纽约市众议员Carolyn Maloney和Jerrold Nadler之间的民主党初选正在走向痛苦的个人结局，将看到一名资深众议院成员离开国会。
司法委员会主席纳德勒和监督与改革委员会主席马洛尼被拉入同一个席位，即第12个席位，这是重划选区过程中的一个意外转折，现在纽约选民需要在两个拥有既定权力基础的城市巨头之间做出决定。
38岁的律师、奥巴马的前工作人员苏拉吉·帕特尔是一名进步人士，他也对这两位70多岁的老人进行了代际辩论。
观察人士说，在周二的初选之前，纳德勒已经成为三人组的领跑者，但选举日将结束对城市居民来说令人沮丧和讨厌的竞选。
“这次的输家是纽约。纽约选民被迫陷入这种混乱的局面，被迫做出一个他们从未计划过也从未打算过的选择。这两位议员在选民中声望很高，”纽约市民主党策略师乔恩·赖尼什说。“如果你是纽约市的选民，不得不做出这样的选择真的很糟糕。”
纳德勒和马洛尼都在1992年当选，他们与曼哈顿的不同地区有着长期的联系。
纳德勒多年来代表着上西区的一个选区，而马洛尼的旧席位覆盖了上东区，这是纽约市的两个富人区。
帕特尔没有担任过公职，但在2020年的初选中以4%的差距击败了马洛尼。
纳德勒和马洛尼长期以来一直是众议院的盟友，当上次人口普查后，民主党绘制的纽约众议院地图被扔给一个将他们的选区合并在一起的人时，他们感到遗憾。然而，一旦比赛开始，倒钩开始飞。
纳德勒抨击了马洛尼在备受瞩目的问题上的长期投票记录，包括她过去支持伊拉克战争和布什时代的爱国者法案，以及在奥巴马政府期间反对伊朗核协议。纳德勒还试图将马洛尼描述为一个新冠肺炎疫苗怀疑论者，一个在疫情期间特别尖锐的肘击。(她的网站声明，她认为“疫苗是安全、有效的，对公共健康绝对必要。”)
与此同时，马洛尼似乎已经超越了纳德勒的年龄。虽然75岁的纳德勒比马洛尼小一岁，但她似乎在谈论他的耐力时加油添醋，特别是在他坐在初选辩论中，而马洛尼和帕特尔站在一边之后。
本月早些时候，她表达了对“如果出于某种原因，有人不会服刑”的担忧，理由是“外面有大量的谣言”她后来据报道说她认为纳德勒会完成另一个任期。
帕特尔认为，现在是时候改变国会了，同时也抨击纳德勒和马洛尼对乔·拜登总统是否应该在2024年竞选连任的回答含糊不清。
“现在已经不是1992年了，”帕特尔在周一的新闻发布会上说。“从堕胎权利到枪支控制再到气候变化，我们需要精力充沛的新领导人，充满希望、想法和能量的乐观主义者，我们对我们开展这场运动的方式感到无比自豪。”
在竞选初期，人们猜测纳德勒和马洛尼将分裂所谓的建制投票，帕特尔可能会凭借他的新面孔信息获胜。
“我的想法是，帕特尔可以从年轻的新一代中受益。然而，也许这有利于纳德勒和某种程度上的马洛尼，华盛顿民主党人在过去几周内有一些风在他们背后，似乎已经睁开了眼睛，意识到他们是大多数，并已交付。也许这让这两个制度主义者受益，”Reinish说，他指的是国会民主党人最近提交给拜登的主要立法。
Rep. Carolyn Maloney who has represented New York City's Upper East Side since 1993, speaks to supporters, Aug. 22, 2022, in New York.
斯潘塞·普拉特/盖蒂图片公司
纳德勒在最后一段赢得了令人垂涎的《纽约时报》编辑委员会和参议院多数党领袖查克·舒默的支持，这使得马洛尼谴责“团结一致的老男孩网络”的影响。"
无论周二的结果如何，纽约市将失去一位在国会大厦积累了职业生涯价值的资深国会议员。
民主党人哀叹说，这是他们自己造成的损失，因为他们严重不公正划分的众议院地图受到共和党人的挑战，最终被州法院废除，将绘制地图的过程交给了一个没有考虑民主党优先事项的外部特别大师。
“我认为，他们天真地认为，永远不会有一场诉讼能够有效地推翻他们的地图，让他们的进程变得毫无意义，”战略家赖尼什说。“我认为他们根本没有为此做好准备。我认为共和党人很容易找到法官来做这件事。他们做得非常成功。”
NY's Maloney and Nadler set for unexpected face-off that will boot one of the leading Dems from office
The Democratic primary battle between Reps. Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler in New York City is heading to a bitterly personal finish that'll see one of the senior House members leave Congress.
Nadler, who chairs the judiciary committee, and Maloney, who helms the committee on oversight and reform, were drawn into the same seat, the 12th, in an unexpected twist in the redistricting process that now leaves New York voters deciding between two city titans with established power bases.
Attorney and former Obama staffer Suraj Patel, a 38-year-old progressive, is also running on a generational argument against the two septuagenarians.
Nadler has emerged as the front-runner of the trio in the lead-up to Tuesday's primary, but Election Day will cap off a frustrating and nasty stretch of the race for city residents, observers say.
"The loser in this is New York. New York voters have been forced into this messy situation of being forced to make a choice that they never planned to and never intended. These are two members in good standing with the electorate," said New York City-based Democratic strategist Jon Reinish. "If you're a New York City voter, it really sucks to have to make this choice."
Nadler and Maloney, both elected in 1992, have longstanding ties to different parts of Manhattan.
Nadler for years represented a district anchored in the Upper West Side and Maloney's old seat covered the Upper East Side, two wealthy enclaves in New York City.
Patel hasn't held public office but came within 4% of beating Maloney in a primary in 2020.
Nadler and Maloney have long been allies in the House and lamented the circumstances they were handed when a Democratic-drawn House map for New York, after the last census, was tossed in favor of one lumping their districts together. Yet once the race got underway, barbs started to fly.
Nadler has torn into Maloney's long voting record on high-profile issues, including her past support for the Iraq War and Bush-era Patriot Act and opposition to the Iran nuclear deal during the Obama administration. Nadler also sought to characterize Maloney as a COVID-19 vaccine skeptic, a particularly sharp elbow to be thrown during the pandemic. (Her website states that she believes "vaccines are safe, effective, and absolutely essential for public health.")
Maloney, meanwhile, has seemingly gone after Nadler's age. While Nadler, 75, is one year Maloney's junior, she appeared to pour jet fuel on chatter about his stamina, particularly after he sat at a primary debate while Maloney and Patel stood.
Earlier this month she expressed concerns about "if for some reason someone will not serve their term," citing "tons of rumors out there." She laterreportedly saidshe thinks Nadler would finish another term.
Patel has argued that it's time for a change in Congress while also hitting Nadler and Maloney for wishy-washy answers over whether President Joe Biden should run for reelection in 2024.
"This is not 1992 anymore," Patel said in a press conference on Monday. "From abortion rights to gun control to climate change, we need energetic, new leaders, optimists with hope and ideas and energy, and we are incredibly proud of the way we have conducted this campaign."
Early in the race, it was speculated that Nadler and Maloney would split the so-called establishment vote and that Patel could win on his fresh-faced message.
"My thought was that Patel could benefit from that being from a new and younger generation. However, maybe it has benefited Nadler and to an extent Maloney that Washington Democrats over the past couple of weeks have some wind at their backs, seem to have opened up their eyes, realized that they're in the majority and have delivered. And maybe that has benefited these two institutionalists," Reinish said, referring to recent major legislation congressional Democrats have sent to Biden's desk.
Nadler has enjoyed a burst of momentum in the final stretch, winning the coveted endorsements of The New York Times' editorial board and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer -- support that led Maloney to decry the influence of the "old boys' network that sticks together."
Regardless of the outcome Tuesday, New York City will be losing a senior member of Congress who's built up a career's worth of chits in the Capitol.
Democrats lament that as a self-inflicted loss after their heavily gerrymandered House map was challenged by Republicans and ultimately scrapped by a state court, handing the map-drawling process to an outside special master who did not take Democratic priorities into account.
"I think that they naively thought that there would never be a lawsuit that could effectively overturn their maps and render their process moot," said Reinish, the strategist. "And I think that they did not plan at all well for that. And I think it was very easy for the Republicans to find a judge to do it. They did it very successfully."
