Pierson Extends Kudos To Levin For “Backing Down”

By on July 18, 2013 11:50 pm in Brooklyn Heights, Election 13

Earlier this week, we reported on accusations made by political consultant Chris Owens’ on behalf of NYC council D-33 hopeful Stephen Pierson. Owens claimed that incumbent Steve Levin was attempting to knock the challenger off the ballot.

Levin quickly responded personally to BHB on Tuesday saying that his campaign had made a routine review of Pierson’s petitions and that, “The review is now complete and we found no basis to file a formal challenge.”

Pierson tweeted a statement this afternoon:

Share this Story:

, , , ,

  • welcometomoviefone

    Was that challenge a rookie mistake from a rookie campaign manager, or levin showing his true devilish stripes? Probably some combination of the two…

  • Peter Pan

    Slippery as a greased pig, thou art.

  • welcometomoviefone

    Thank you!

  • MonroeOrange

    VOTE NONE OF THE ABOVE!

  • Peter Pan

    No, thank you!

  • klowy

    That’s pretty funny. He makes up a story about Levin wanting to throw him off the ballot, then makes a big deal of the incumbent “backing down” when Levin did neither. And some people buy it. These are the kinds of things republicans usually do. Hey Pierson, do you have any proof that Levin was trying to knock you out? Anything?

  • chaps

    Levin filed a general objection against Pierson’s petitions. Levin’s own Campaign Manager said so.

  • http://selfabsorbedboomer.blogspot.com/ Claude Scales

    As I understand it–I’m not an expert on election law–filing a general objection doesn’t amount to trying to throw someone off the ballot. It simply preserves the right to make specific objections that, if allowed, would result in the removal of the signatures to which such specific objections were made. It’s therefore routinely done in most contested elections. In this instance, Levin chose not to make any specific objections.

  • klowy

    Claude is correct. It is absolutely dishonest to say Levin tried to have him thrown off the ballot. The headline should read “Pierson backs down after admitting he made the whole thing up?” What happened to running an honest campaign? If Pierson disagrees with Levin or would do things differently, those are real campaign issues. But if this is how he’s going to run his campaign, then that’s very sad.

  • welcometomoviefone

    Kenn you seem very angry today.

  • klowy

    I don’t like dishonesty. I especially don’t like it when it’s a Democrat doing it. I’m not thrilled with people who hide their identities either.

  • welcometomoviefone

    btw Claude, that Rembrandt (The Mill) you posted on your blog is great. One of my favorites.

  • welcometomoviefone

    The situation was enough (per the previous article posted on this site) that BOTH candidates wrote in a response and that Levin’s campaign manager took to a comment board (a comment board!) to try and brush it aside/excuse it. That tells me it was/is a serious issue/attempt.

    I respect your support of Levin. I understand he has been trying hard to help you out with your Cinema and the zoning/development issues. You have probably given campaign donations to him as well. To each his/her own. Viva democracy. Even if your choice is MonroeOrange’s ‘None of the Above’ (a solid movie reference, btw MonroeO)

  • BrooklynBugle

    And what’s your skin in the game movie phone?

  • klowy

    I appreciate that you know who I am (I stand behind what I write, I don’t try to hide who I am).

    Don’t you agree that when someone accuses you of something you have not done, that you should defend yourself? Isn’t that what Levin did? I know you will disagree, so let’s just assume I know that.

    Yes, Steve is very supportive of the cinema. But all the elected are (Liu, de Blasio, Millman, Markowitz, Velasquez, James, etc.). I support Steve because of what he has done in representing this part of Brooklyn. And I like having a musician in the City Council. It’s pretty easy to find out how much I donated to Steve’s campaign (I won’t tell you how to do that, you already know how). I don’t think you’ll be impressed. Pretty much every penny I have goes to keeping the cinema open.

    I do believe in democracy. I just think, as I’ve already written, that the best way to go is with honesty. Even I’m getting bored with this exchange though. Tell me who you are, and I’ll respond again.

  • chaps

    My understanding is that filing general objections is the first step to a challenge, and specifications are the second step. And it’s routine primarily among party machine candidates.

  • http://selfabsorbedboomer.blogspot.com/ Claude Scales

    Thanks; one of mine, too.

  • Ann B Chapin

    I totally agree with you about people hiding who they are behind silly “screen names”. If you have something to say, stand by it!

  • Remsen Street Dweller

    Um, one of them has been out in the trenches working to save our local hospital and the other sending forth lame accusations. Duh, I know who I’ll vote for.

  • welcometomoviefone

    You’re right, this discussion should end. And also that is wrong of me to get that personal. Apologies. Especially since I like your taste in movies at the theater. I let my disdain/distrust of Levin percolate up too much.

    My skin is simply I know someone who worked with Levin for long enough that I know he is a classic election year type politician… a favors for votes/money kind of guy. Off camera a different character. I understand “that’s politics” but I like the heights and it bugs me. I see enough of this in my day job (finance). I’ll be curious to dig into who donates to Levin’s campaign. (not a reference to you in that).

    I’ve attended some Pierson events and talked with someone who used to work at his tutoring program. I get the sense he is who he says he is. Not an experienced politician for sure but someone who’s trying to do some good. To me, that’s pretty refreshing. I trust Pierson to do what he thinks is good for the district (even though I may or may not agree with what that is); I trust Levin to do what is good for his people in the district (or in the case of Ridgewood Bushwick, out of the district).