Mediaboss Marketing

Blade Runner is my favorite movie of all time. And I am super-excited to see the sequel, Blade Runner 2049. But Ive come to realize that the movie takes on a different meaning in the age of Black Lives Matter.

Released in 1982 and directed by Ridley Scott, the dystopian sci-fi movie Blade Runner is set in 2019 Los Angeles where the rain never ceases and the sun is always shrouded by a thick curtain of smoggy clouds. The movie, loosely based on Philip K. Dicks novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, tells the story of a policeman named Deckard (Harrison Ford) from the Blade Runner unit. He is dispatched to retire (kill) five Replicants (androids) who have escaped from an Off-World colony and returned to Earth. They are the most sophisticated Replicants of a generation known as NEXUS-6. More human than human, is the motto of the Tyrell Corporation that creates them. The problem is that the NEXUS-6 Replicants have developed self-awareness and revolted against their human owners. Their return to Earth is driven by a desire to find a way to prolong their pre-programmed four-year lifespan.

Ive been watching this movie (both the original studio release and the directors cut) for the past 35 years. Ive saturated myself with the richly-synthetic soundtrack by Vangelis, and spent many days as a teen learning to play the music by ear. Ive read the script and watched the documentary about the movie. And I am eagerly anticipating the sequel, Blade Runner 2049, due out in October 2017.

But I saw something very different when I watched the movie a few days ago.

In anticipation of the release of the sequel, I sat down with friends to re-watch the original. It had been a few years since I last viewed the film. In that time, the Black Lives Matter movement, started in 2013 in response to police brutality and the murders of black citizens, has been working on my heart and mind. As a middle-class white woman who has benefited from privilege on so many levels, I know that the process of becoming woke is long and uncomfortable, but absolutely necessary.

My growing awareness of issues around bias, white supremacy, and racial violence has caused me to look at the world in a different way. As Roy Batty, the head Replicant, says to the man who genetically-designed his eyes, If only you could see what Ive seen with your eyes. Where I had previously thought of Blade Runner as a future-scape, what I see in the movie now is a metaphor for the ways in which blacks have been viewed and treated in this country for centuries and into the present time.

Granted, this may seem like a leap, since there are no people of African descent in the film, save for a few faces in the crowds. Except for Edward James Olmos (who plays a fellow detective in the Blade Runner unit), James Hong (a genetic engineer), and an assortment of minor ethnic characters, this is a film with white actors in the main roles.

And the NEXUS-6 Replicants are all white. Which is telling in and of itself. Did the Tyrell Corporation (or the films creators) deem it unsavory to create black Replicants? Would dark-skinned Replicants be too uncomfortable a reminder of the slave history of this country? Are Replicants of the caucasian flavor somehow more palatable?

These are not questions the film deals with. But they are questions I bring to the film. And now that I have begun to understand the ways in which people of color are targeted by violence and systemic racism, Blade Runner looks different to me than it did as a teenager in the 80s.

This is the one reference to race in the film. In Deckards overdubbed narration, he explains the kind of man he works for, and gives some insight into the ways in which humans regard Replicants. They were created to serve, to do the dirty and dangerous work. The women are pleasure models intended to provide sexual gratification. And both the male and female Replicants are designed to be violent killing machines for death-squads when necessary.

Replicants were engineered to copy humans in all ways save one no emotions. But in time, the Replicants do, in fact, develop feelings, and thus self-awareness. When they come to realize they are nothing more than slaves, they naturally rebel against their state of servitude. They turn on their owners, and do everything they can to escape and secure their freedom (including killing humans if necessary). Thus, they are deemed too dangerous for Earth itself. Replicants on Earth are illegal. And cops in the Blade Runner unit are sent out to kill any that return (ICE agents, anyone?).

This is exactly how the Europeans in the original slave trade, and the subsequent American slave owners, viewed Africans. They were and often still are viewed as subhuman, no better than animals, and devoid of emotions. When people of color get out of hand by being too emotional (angry) or demanding their freedom and equal rights, the police are sent out to use any means necessary to maintain law and order including the use of deadly force.

A major theme in Blade Runner is the way in which humans engineer and construct their conceptualizations of themselves and each other, and this has parallels in the study of race theory. The idea that one human being can own another is notion that has, in a sense, been engineered constructed in human consciousness since the beginning of civilization.

On top of that, the concept of a black person is also a construct. In Africa, the natives did not think of themselves as black. It was only when Europeans with lighter skin saw an opportunity to colonize and enslave entire tribes of people throughout the continent that the category of blackness came into being. Eventually blackness became a cipher for all the negative qualities of humanity aggressiveness, wildness, hyper-sexuality, superhuman physical abilities, and ferocious anger. These are exactly the qualities that humans in the Blade Runner world both exploit and simultaneously fear in the Replicants.

We could say that those who are categorized as black humans have historically functioned as Replicant-type automatons. They are expected to perform their duties of hard labor, domestic chores, and sexual servitude without question, without feelings, and with total obedience.

But of course, they are human. And they know in every cell of their bodies that their inhumane treatment is intolerable. As with the Replicants, African slaves rebelled against their owners, made desperate attempts to escape the brutality of their captivity, and did everything they could to secure their own freedom (even if it meant uprisings and killing their captors). Yet even after the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863, and the Civil Rights Movement a century later, people of color continue to find themselves regarded as less than human by their white counterparts.

I recently attended a training session by VISIONS, Inc., an organization founded by three black women in 1984 to help organizations and individuals deal with issues of diversity in a more effective way. One of the participants, a black man, shared how it has felt for him to be treated as less than because of his race. I have felt inhuman, he shared. I feel that Im regarded as disposable, replaceable, that my existence doesnt really matter. I know that when I go certain places and encounter certain people, Im perceived as a threat, even though I intend no harm.

As a white person, this was necessary for me to hear. Because for hundreds of years, society has conditioned both white and black folk to think of blacks as dangerous, even murderous. Our interactions have been colored by mistrust, fear, and overreactions to perceived threats. This has become blatantly obvious in the stunning number of murders of blacks over the years, especially high-profile cases where police officers shoot unarmed blacks without provocation.

There is a particular scene in Blade Runner which brought this home for me. Deckard discovers one of the Replicants named Zhora working as an exotic dancer in a bar. Zhora makes a run for it, trying to lose Deckard in the crowded city streets. But he catches up with her and aims his gun right at her back. He fires and she falls through breaking plate glass, fake snow swirling around her bloodied body.

I could not help but recall the 2015 video of Walter Scott being shot in the back eight times by officer Michael Slager in Charleston, North Carolina. Slager recently pled guilty to violating Scotts civil rights a rarity in law enforcement where only 35% of cases of fatal on-duty shootings end up in convictions. In most cases, the scene is similar to the one in the movie where Deckard simply shows his badge to the other officer, and walks away scott free while a recorded voice from the police cruiser drones repeatedly: Move on. Move on. Move on.

There are no consequences for Deckard shooting an unarmed woman in the back. If he came before a court of law they would undoubtedly agree (as most juries do today) that he perceived a threat and justifiably opened fire. What he did was not considered murder in the eyes of the law, because, ultimately, Zhora was not considered to be a human being. So her life did not matter. But the truth is, she was human, and her life did matter. She had feelings, had friends who cared about her, and wanted nothing more than freedom and to live her life.

Life is precisely what has been stolen from the NEXUS-6 Replicants. They are given no longer than four years, and then a genetically-programmed switch shuts them down and they die. Its the failsafe to keep them under control, to prevent them from taking over.

Again, the metaphor for the black community is eerily resonant. Blacks statistically have a shorter lifespan (75 years) than their white counterparts (79 years). [For a great article cataloging the health issues related to black deaths, click here].

There are also many institutional structures that have been put in place to keep blacks under control and prevent them from taking over. Redistricting, gerrymandering, and red-lining. Higher interest rates charged for loans. Stop-and-frisk laws and stand-your-ground laws. Zero-tolerance rules, and excessive sentencing for criminal convictions. All of these (and more), plus the rise of blatant white supremacist groups to intimidate (and eliminate) people of color are just some of the ways in which modern racism manifests itself.

The constant reminder of being imprisoned by others racial attitudes was a point recently reiterated for me by Michael W. Waters, author of Stakes is High: Race, Faith, and Hope in America (Chalice Press). In a panel on preaching at the 2017 Wild Goose Festival, he reminded us how painful it is for a person of color to be trapped in their epidermis, knowing all the threats and risks that come with living in a body that has been constructed by race.

Interestingly, Blade Runner set the stage for other media to explore this question of what it means to be fully human versus subhuman and owned by those in power:

What Blade Runner and these other films and television programs urge us to consider is not just a future where we must confront the possibility of Artificial Intelligence and mind-altered primates gaining cognizance of self, but something much more immediate. They pose uncomfortable but important questions about the ways in which we regard dark-skinned humans as automatons or animals, and the ways in which such attitudes result in turning us into the evil we have projected onto black people.

In the final scene of the battle between Roy and Deckard, it was not lost on me the significance of Roy saving Deckard from death. As the Blade Runner dangles from a girder at the top of a building, his fingers slip and he falls. But Roy grabs him and pulls him back up onto the roof with one hand. It is a hand stuck through with a nail he had used to keep his failing body alive the only way he knew how with pain.

In that moment, Roy becomes a Christ-like figure, his hand reminiscent of Jesuss own hand nailed to the cross. The crucifixion was a saving act. And Roys stunning last act saving Deckard when he did not at all deserve saving was a powerful scene of grace (complete with Roys white dove, a symbol of the Holy Spirit).

As I learned in my VISIONS training, when it comes to racial reconciliation, wounded hands continue to reach out and grab us with a grace that will not let us go.

Despite the Black Lives Matter hermeneutic Ive used to analyze Blade Runner, I must admit that the subtle metaphor for race relations Im seeing in the film does not rescue it from its inherent whiteness. And as I watched the trailer for the sequel, Blade Runner 2049, Im preparing myself for the same diversity let-down. Granted, the new movie obviously takes up again the questions of what it means to be human, and what it means to subjugate an entire people to slavery (Every civilization was built on the back of a disposable work force, says one of the characters, as we see a scene of manufactured bodies of various skin tones). But if the 3-minute sneak preview of the film is any indication, whiteness is still the dominate ethos of the film, and thus the director and producers. Because there appear to be no actors of color in any of the main roles.

This would be a shame. Because as stunning and visionary as the films are, their white-washing of racial diversity is a real blind spot.

The future Im hoping for is the normalization and celebration of brownness and blackness to the point where both the pain and joy of the racial experience are woven into the fabric of our personal, interpersonal and societal relationships. But with more than 400 years of slavery and white supremacy in our past, and the continued resistance of our culture to do the work of racial reconciliation, it looks like the future Im hoping for is even further away than 2049.

For another perspective on Blade Runner, check out: Do You Like Our Owl? Blade Runner and Climate Change

Leah D. Schade is the Assistant Professor of Preaching and Worship atLexington Theological Seminary(Kentucky) and author of the bookCreation-Crisis Preaching: Ecology, Theology, and the Pulpit(Chalice Press, 2015).

You can follow Leah on Twitter at@LeahSchade, and on Facebook athttps://www.facebook.com/LeahDSchade/.

The rest is here:
Watching 'Blade Runner' in the Age of Black Lives Matter - Patheos (blog)

Rep. John Delaney, a 54-year-old moderate Maryland Democrat and former banking executive, has been discussing plans for a potential presidential campaign in 2020, three people familiar with the talks said on Thursday afternoon.

The Democrats said that Delaney has told people he will forgo both a run for reelection in Maryland's 6th congressional district and a run for governor in 2018, and that he's increasingly moved toward the idea of a presidential bid instead.

He is expected to lay out his plans in a Washington Post op-ed, set to run in print on Sunday and online as early as Friday afternoon. A number of Maryland news outlets and blogs have been closely monitoring developments on the Delaney story, with one site, Maryland Matters, dubbing Friday "D-Day" in Maryland politics, "the day that Rep. John Delaney announces his political plans for 2018 and perhaps beyond." Maryland Matters and Bethesda Magazine reported first this week on Delaney's mounting interest in 2020 and on Friday's forthcoming op-ed.

A spokesman, Will McDonald, did not return requests for comment.

The news would make Delaney the first Democrat to openly declare his interest in a presidential bid. It would also put a centrist, pro-business, self-funding Democrat out early in a primary that will come down in part to the progressive voters that backed Bernie Sanders and nearly upended Hillary Clinton's chances at the nomination.

In Congress, Delaney caucuses with the centrist "New Democrats," and considers himself to be socially liberal but fiscally prudent. Since his election in 2012, he has championed a wide range of legislation, including measures to create access to universal pre-K, form an independent commission for redistricting, reduce the corporate tax rate, institute a federal tax on carbon pollution, and establish a new aid program to provide financial assistance and benefits to coal workers.

In Delaney's view, Democrats close to him said, there is room in the race for a candidate who can run as a job creator who understands the need for regulation in business but also the value of the free market a strong general election candidate if he can weather a primary, as a person familiar with his plans put it on Thursday.

Asked about the idea of a New Democrat entering the 2020 race first, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Adam Green, replied, "John who?"

Another consideration for Delaney, whose estimated net worth is more than $91 million, comes down to a question of self-funding: If he's going to spend millions of his own money, better to do it on a national level, as two Democrats put it.

"He was never gonna run for governor," said a top Maryland Democrat, noting that the sitting Republican in office, Gov. Larry Hogan, has a strong approval rating and would be tough to beat for any Democrat. "It sounds crazy, but its not as crazy if you take a second to think about it. There is no Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama this time."

Even with more than three years to go until the next presidential election, Delaney has been considering the idea of a 2020 bid for a number of months now.

His political advisers have included strategists at SKDKnickerbocker, the prominent Washington firm, as well as friends from a large cross-section of the political word. (The invite list for his annual Christmas party ranges from financial executives and leaders in the Catholic Church to Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.)

Although the Washington Post op-ed is expected to explicitly state his interest in running for president, Democrats said there could be a last-minute change.

See original here:
The First Democrat Talking About A Presidential Bid Is A Pro-Business Moderate - BuzzFeed News

Democrats largely protested a GOP effort to put senators on the record on a plan providinguniversal health care, but a handful running for re-election in Republican-leaning states decided to reject the single-payer system.

Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont, introduced an amendment Wednesday night to amend the House-passed health care legislation currently on the floor and replace it with a Democratic bill giving every American health care through Medicare. Daines does not support the Medicare-for-All bill, but he argued that the American people should know Democratsposition on the issue. Democrats cried foul, saying that Republicans were playing politics.

For Senate Democrats, avote against the bill would risk angering the progressive Democratic base, with more liberal groups rallying around the single-payer option. But a vote for the bill could spark criticismfrom the moderate wingthat is wary of a government-run health care system.

Asked if the Thursday vote put Democrats up for re-election in the 2018 midtermsin the difficult position of taking a stance on a contentious intra-party issue, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollendidnt respond directly.

I think every member will vote based on what they think is best for their state, the Maryland Democratsaid.

And a handful of Senate Democrats in some of the most competitivere-election decided supporting the bill was not good policy or politics.

Forty three of the 48 Democratsvoted present on the amendment. But fourSenate Democrats and one Independent who caucuses with them all voted no. All of them are up for re-election in 2018, and the fourDemocrats are running in states that President Donald Trump won in November.

We need realistic solutions to help fix our health care system and Ill keep trying to work across the aisle to do just that, Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., said in a statement explaining her no vote. The decision was made in 2010 to go with a market-based system the question is how we improve the system we have.

Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, also voted against the bill. Thatdoesnt necessarily express his final opinion on the subject, he said.

But the bill had way too many complications King said. I didnt think it was a good bill, so I voted no.

Trump won one of Maines four electoral votes last November. Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales rates Kings re-election race as a Solidly Democratic.

Three of the Senate Democrats in tossup races Heitkamp, Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Joe Manchin III of West Virginia also voted no. Sen. John Tester of Montana also rejected the amendment. Hisre-election race israted Tilt Democrat.

Those who voted present sided with Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who supports single-payer but called the GOP amendment a political trick on the Senate floor. Sanders decided Wednesday night, in consultationwith Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer, that he would not be voting in favor of the amendment. And theyencouraged fellow Democrats to do the same.

One Democratin a tossup race voted present even though she opposes a single-payer system.

I am not for single-payer said it a million times,Sen. Claire McCaskill explained after the vote. Im for public option. Im for buy-in on Medicare for 55-65. And ... I dont think anybody in Missouri is going to think Im afraid of taking a tough vote. So Im not worried aboutthat."

But I am worried that they dont realize what a sham this has become, the Missouri Democrat added. [Republicans] arenow saying they will only pass a bill if theyre positive the House wont pass it. This is like the twilight zone. I mean its crazy.

McCaskill was referring to GOP leadership's plan to pass a skinny repeal of provisions of the Affordable Care Act, so that the Senate could go to a conference with the House and negotiate a more comprehensive Obamacare repeal bill.

The skinny repeal is still being drafted. Democrats accused Republicans of playing political games in the meantime.

Sen. Christopher S. Murphy said he was not concerned that single-payer supporters would be angry that Democrats did not voice support for the legislation.

People who are pushing single payer understand that this is a sham process, the Connecticut Democrat said. Once the dust settles on this repeal effort were going to have a really important conversation about what the future of U.S. health care is. But this is a total sham. Were not going to let it dictate the terms of the debate on Medicare-for-All.

Ken Zinn, political director for the National Nurses United, which supports the Medicare-for-All legislation, said he understood Democrats decision to vote present.

As Sen. Sanders correctly pointed out on the Senate floor, this was a ploy by Sen. Daines, Zinn said.

Zinn expected a renewed push for single-payer after the GOP health care votes this week, and expects Sanders to introduce his own Medicare-for-All legislation in the coming weeks.

Zinn said the union would be approaching the senators who voted against the amendment Thursday and urge them to support Sanders bill. He said those who do not support the proposal would absolutely face political blowback.

The movement for single payer, Medicare-for-All, is growing by leaps and bounds across the country, Zinn said. Those who are not willing to go there are going to have to face the consequences when they face their constituents or their voters.

Republicans were quick to criticize Senate Democrats for their votes on the bill, accusing them of ducking a policy the Democratic base supports.

Senate Democrats had the opportunity to put their money where their mouths are and vote for their own government-run health care plan, and they promptly went into hiding, said NationalRepublican Senatorial Committee spokeswomanKatie Martin.

Andy Van Wye contributed to this report.Correction:A previous version of this story incorrectly stated Sen. Bill Nelsons vote. The Florida Democratvoted present.

Get breaking news alerts and more from Roll Call on your iPhone or your Android.

Original post:
Some Red State Democrats Reject Single-Payer Amendment - Roll Call

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Thursday, July 27, 2017, 6:27 PM

ALBANY A former one-term state senator who had the backing of Mayor de Blasio is considering challenging Gov. Cuomo from the left in the Democratic primary next year.

Terry Gipson represented Dutchess and Putnam counties for two years before losing his re-election bid in 2014 to Republican Sue Serino.

The involvement of de Blasio and his fund-raising operation in the race caught the attention of investigators, who looked into whether they skirted campaign contribution laws. Ultimately, the offices of the Manhattan U.S. Attorney and the Manhattan District Attorney declined to bring charges even as they raised ethical questions.

Gipson, who lost a rematch to Serino in 2016, has been critical on social media of Cuomo on a host of issues, including his handling of the mass transit crisis. He is said to have been reaching out to liberal groups about a potential primary run.

Voters blame Gov. Cuomo for city's subway troubles: poll

One Democratic insider called Gipson a two-time loser who never even broke 50% in his own community. The one time he won it was a three-way race.

While Cuomo has faced public criticism from many in the left wing of the Democratic Party, the insider noted a recent Siena College poll found the two-term governor is still strong among self-described liberals. The poll found 68% of liberals have a favorable view of Cuomo. And by a 54% to 37% margin, liberals said they are prepared to re-elect Cuomo in 2018.

Cuomo faced a surprising strong primary challenge in 2014 from liberal Fordham Law Prof. Zephyr Teachout, who captured about a third of the vote but has said she does not intend to run again in 2018.

Read the original here:
Upstate Democrat Terry Gipson mulls 2018 run against Cuomo - New York Daily News

For a shrewd political tactician who seldom says or doesnt say anything without political purpose, Mr. Cuomos positioning has raised questions from allies and opponents alike: Is he a savvy politician playing the long game, or being too clever for his own good?

The first and biggest test of his nonaggression approach came on Wednesday, as Mr. Cuomo made his first trip to Washington since the start of the Trump administration. He met with the transportation secretary, Elaine Chao, to lobby for additional federal funding for the states infrastructure needs.

While in Washington, Mr. Cuomo took time to respond to Mr. Trumps directive, announced on Twitter, that transgender people be barred from the military. In his own Twitter post, Mr. Cuomo criticized the policy as wrong and intolerant, but blamed Washingtons directive, not Mr. Trump.

The governors elliptical phrase received some ribbing online. News flash it came from trump. Not George Washington, replied Elizabeth Soto, the executive director of the Hudson Valley Labor Federation. The governors office also issued a news release that cited the Trump administration.

Two of Mr. Cuomos advisers who have spoken with the governor about his choice not to attack Mr. Trump in personal terms said he decided not long after Novembers election to forge a verbal dtente with a president who, like Mr. Cuomo, has a long memory for those who cross him.

Advisers to both Mr. Cuomo and Mr. Trump describe them as aggressive counterpunchers, and Mr. Cuomo seems determined not to throw the first jab.

Those in Mr. Cuomos orbit pointed to two factors in the decision: first, the possibility of working with Mr. Trump to procure federal money for state projects, and second, the fear of alienating working-class white voters upstate whom Mr. Cuomo wants to capture in his 2018 re-election effort.

He decided early on he wasnt going to stick a finger in Trumps eye, said one of Mr. Cuomos advisers, who was not authorized to disclose internal strategy discussions.

Mr. Cuomo has criticized some of the presidents policies. After Mr. Trump announced Americas withdrawal from an international climate accord, Mr. Cuomo helped organize a coalition of states to fill the breach, criticizing this administration and the White Houses reckless decision. He has also spoken out against the administrations immigration and deportation policies.

But the governor has remained loath to go after Mr. Trump by name, even as the presidents popularity has plunged to historic lows, and as other Democrats, who signaled an early willingness to work with the president, like Senator Chuck Schumer, have adopted a harder line. Hours after Mr. Cuomo held a rally against the Republican health care bill last week in Manhattan and did not mention the presidents name in his 15-minute speech, Mr. Schumer branded that days setback a failure of Trumpcare.

In June, when Mr. Cuomo wrote an op-ed lamenting the Trump administrations immigration policies, he blamed the federal government, not Mr. Trump, for having forgotten who we are as a nation. In July, when Mr. Cuomo wrote about the health care bill, he cited the White Houses insistence that the legislation had heart, though it was Mr. Trump himself who had said so.

And when reporters recently asked Mr. Cuomo about Donald Trump Jr.s email with a Russia-linked lawyer, he took a pass. Ive been working, he said. Mr. Cuomo also skipped commenting on Mr. Trumps Twitter attacks on the MSNBC host Mika Brzezinski. Let me read them first, he replied.

The nonanswers sounded more like the comments of congressional Republicans who have grown skilled in the art of the Trump dodge than those of a nationally ambitious Democrat.

In contrast, at the recent rally where Mr. Cuomo left the president unnamed, the Democratic state attorney general, Eric T. Schneiderman, introduced himself as a guy who sues Donald Trump. It earned some of his loudest applause.

Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City, a Democrat, traveled to Germany this month in hopes of casting himself as a foil to the president. And Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand, Democrat of New York, who also could be a 2020 presidential contender, has been buying up online search ads calling herself a leader of the resistance who is standing up to Trump.

Cuomo could, if he wanted, attack Trump 20 times a day and it wouldnt hurt him a bit in the state of New York, said Robert M. Shrum, a longtime national Democratic strategist. Mr. Shrum said the governor had demonstrated a habit of not getting involved in national politics, though he added, Im not saying this would be my strategy.

Some of Mr. Cuomos own allies are privately hoping he will soon take a harder line against Mr. Trump, both to cut off oxygen for any potential 2018 Democratic primary opponents he faced a surprisingly stiff challenge from Zephyr Teachout in 2014 and to energize the progressive base he would need to win over in support of any presidential run.

The political left is frothing with anti-Trump energy, marching by the millions and pouring money into the coffers of leaders of the resistance. Bill Hyers, a Democratic strategist who was Mr. de Blasios 2013 campaign manager and is a frequent critic of the governor on Twitter, called Mr. Cuomos decision to avoid verbally confronting Mr. Trump a million percent tone deaf.

Hes wanting to be Trumps favorite Democrat. It makes no sense that he rips on the mayor of New York with pleasure but wont say one negative thing about Donald Trump, even mention his name, Mr. Hyers said. Thats the cowards way out.

Mr. Cuomo and Mr. Trump have a decades-long personal history, dating to the 1980s, when Mr. Trump was a developer and donor to Mr. Cuomos father, former Gov. Mario M. Cuomo. The day after last Novembers election, the governor called Mr. Trumps election a bonus. He knows New York, he knows the challenges, Mr. Cuomo said then.

In January, when Mr. Cuomo went to Trump Tower to meet with the president-elect, they spoke about New York issues, including infrastructure and local tax deductibility.

It was not adversarial, Mr. Cuomo told reporters in the lobby afterward.

Joel Benenson, Hillary Clintons chief strategist in 2016, who served as communications director for the 1994 campaign of Mr. Cuomos father, approved of Mr. Cuomos restraint because there is ample time before a possible 2020 campaign. I dont think you have to make everything about Trump, he said. My advice would be to stick to your knitting and keep doing what youre doing on behalf of New York.

That is how Mr. Cuomo cast his trip to Washington.

I am a vocal critic of many Trump proposals, such as his health care, environment and tax policies, Mr. Cuomo said in his statement. At the same time, my job is to make progress for our state and improve the quality of life for New Yorkers and the federal government must approve and fund many necessary projects especially transportation and infrastructure which is the subject of my discussion with Transportation Secretary Chao.

People close to Mr. Cuomo say he is aware that transportation issues are a potential vulnerability: A recent Siena College poll showed his approval rating dropping to 52 percent from 61 percent since May, with all the erosion in New York City and its suburbs, areas gripped by problems with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

When it comes to Mr. Trump, Jay Jacobs, a former chairman of the New York Democratic Party during Mr. Cuomos first term, said the governor is walking a fine line because he wants to get re-elected in 2018 and he wants to get re-elected with good numbers and a good part of his popularity has come from Republicans, particularly upstate Republicans.

Last week, Mr. Cuomo reported a re-election treasury of more than $25.6 million among the most cash on hand of any politician in America including another $5 million raised in the first six months of 2017, even as he has yet to draw any serious challenger.

Attacking Mr. Trump might be something in the short term that works and gets everybody up into a lather, Mr. Jacobs added, but Cuomo is about the long game.

A version of this article appears in print on July 28, 2017, on Page A23 of the New York edition with the headline: As Democrats Assail Trump, Cuomo Takes a Different Tack.

More here:
As Democrats Lay Into Trump, Cuomo Takes a Different Tack - The ... - New York Times