2025 & 2026 Elections | Adams drops out in NYC

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 808
  • Views: 28K
  • Politics 
Calheel said:
I doubt it. Impossible to prove one way or the other, but I think inflation in 22-23 was the albatross that sunk the democrats in 24.
Click to expand...
Biden (a man) got 81 million votes. Harris and HRC (women) got in the mid-low 70 millions. Trump got close to the same # votes all 3 elections. Trump is the constant and Dems are the variable in this experiment.
 
Paine said:
Your reactions continue to prove my point.

I’ll say it once more: I’m arguing that Mamdani’s message, grounded in housing, transit, and care, cut across communities and helped him overcome red-baiting and a 1% starting point. You responded with borough trivia and personal insults. Why? Because I didn’t memorize a precinct map?

Let’s actually engage the argument. Yes, different boroughs voted differently. That’s true in every citywide race. It doesn’t disprove that material appeals helped Mamdani surge, especially in places where the left has built real organizing infrastructure, like DSA in Brooklyn. And yes, some communities leaned toward Cuomo, for all kinds of reasons: residual name recognition, conservatism on certain issues, lack of engagement by Mamdani’s campaign. That’s called politics.

But you’re twisting basic electoral variation into a gotcha, as if a left candidate needs to sweep every borough for his message to be taken seriously. He was outspent, red-baited, and still won a high-turnout primary in the nation’s media capital. That’s a crack in the narrative you’ve spent this thread defending. And it scares you, so now it’s about me and my supposed ignorance.

I’m not embarrassed. But you seem awfully defensive.
Click to expand...
When you are interpreting every counter-point as supporting your point, you're in MAGA land. You're asserting something unfalsifiable.

It's not borough trivia. It gets to the heart of your analysis. If Mamdani ran on bus fares, then it would make sense that Greenwood would overwhelmingly turn out for him -- because Greenwood is inaccessible by subway. By contrast, East New York is well served by subway. So those two data points support the idea that the mass transit issue resonated. That's a point in your favor.

But does it also follow that the rent freeze was a big deal? Well, one way we could measure that is by plotting rents and Mamdani support. Maybe you'd expect that the places with high rents would go for Mamdani? Except that doesn't appear to be true, at first glance. I'm not seeing a lot of correlation. Bed Stuy is full of large multi-bedroom apartments that aren't rent stabilized; lots of young people get together and rent huge 6 bedroom places to save money. It went for Mamdami. Same with Park Slope (where Cuomo ran worst). But some of the places that would be most affected -- e.g. the older neighborhoods of Manhattan, and importantly, the Bronx-- didn't go for Mamdami.

So with some knowledge of NYC, you can arrive at a working hypothesis that the bus issue was important and the rent issue either less so or actually hurt him. I mean, this is an eyeball analysis; to be sure, we'd need to crunch some numbers. But we can at least get close with some knowledge of the city.

Wanna know why Cuomo ran better in the Bronx than Brooklyn? Well, there are comparatively more Jewish areas there. Brooklyn has some Jewish neighborhoods, but they are overwhelmed by other ethnicities borough-wide. So that supports the idea that some of the voting was about the war, as posters have claimed. And in particular, the Jewish neighborhoods in the Bronx voted for Cuomo by large margins.

Get the point now? Stop trying to lecture New Yorkers about what happened in New York City because you have no idea what you're talking about.

I'm not worried about any "crack in the narrative." I go with the truth. If new evidence emerges that challenges my narrative, then I change the narrative. But you've got to interpret the evidence correctly, which you simply cannot do without statistics or working knowledge of the area.
 
Kingpin said:
Biden (a man) got 81 million votes. Harris and HRC (women) got in the mid-low 70 millions. Trump got close to the same # votes all 3 elections. Trump is the constant and Dems are the variable in this experiment.
Click to expand...
Or anti-incumbency was the constant in 2016, 2020 and 2024.

If that same Biden had run in 2024, he likely loses by way more than Kamala and the senate/house is even more republican.
 
Calheel said:
Or anti-incumbency was the constant in 2016, 2020 and 2024.

If that same Biden had run in 2024, he likely loses by way more than Kamala and the senate/house is even more republican.
Click to expand...
I agree Biden would have lost. That is why I clarified the white male. Can’t be senile and must be under under 70 (and can’t be gay ot Muslim etc). Someone like Andy Bashear but not necessarily him. I truly believe an outside (not incumbent) male would have beaten Trump in 2016 and 2024. The reduced vote turnout for females is real. Same thing happened to Stacey Abrams in Ga in 2022. Same election/electorate. Warnock got considerably more votes than Abrams in same election. Same person at ballot box checked Warnock (1,956,117) and decided to not vote for Abrams (1,811,471). Different races of course (Sen vs Gov).

Both black. One male one female. It’s real (unfortunately) and Dems need to put up the right person in 2025/26 and 2028.
 
Last edited:
Paine said:
Mamdani gained traction where organizing infrastructure exists and where his message reached people. Bed-Stuy and Park Slope didn’t go for him despite rent issues, they went for him because the left has a real presence there. The rent freeze wasn’t aimed at wealthy co-ops. It was part of a broader message about dignity for working people. Same with transit: it wasn’t just about bus routes in Greenwood, it was a citywide call for free and reliable service.

Your rent freeze point flips basic politics on its head. The people paying the highest rents aren’t usually the ones demanding rent freezes, they’re the ones least likely to be impacted. The rent freeze resonated most where renters are vulnerable, where tenant organizing is strong, and where people are struggling with rent hikes, not in the wealthiest ZIP codes.

You even said you were surprised that East Flatbush went for Cuomo, when anyone with a basic grasp of the race knew that Cuomo’s base of support came largely from Black voters. That’s not some niche local insight; it was one of the most widely reported dynamics of the primary. Acting like this disproves Mamdani’s message just shows how disconnected your frame is from actual organizing and political reality.

As for your “eyeball analysis." you don’t even live in NYC anymore. Meanwhile, plenty of actual New Yorkers, including journalists and organizers, have made the same points I’m making. That two board posters disagree with me doesn’t invalidate the broader takeaway. You keep leaning on lived experience, but apparently only yours counts.

If all this leads you to call me MAGA and say I’m embarrassing myself, maybe it’s because the argument isn’t going your way, and you know it.
Click to expand...
He’s not calling you MAGA. He’s saying your argument is similar to MAGA statements and arguments - heavy on assumptions or bias and light on facts. That’s how I read his comments.

You often repeat four points in why Mamdani won:
  • Housing costs
  • Transit needs
  • Care infrastructure
  • Economic dignity
Without a doubt, those topics resonated with many voters (although many likely were scratching their heads over just WTF “care infrastructure” and “economic dignity” mean). And, I realize Mamdani might not have used such terms.

What you haven’t mentioned is that a HUGE percentage of NYC citizens were just done with Andrew Cuomo (they helped force him out of the governor’s office).

Cuomo was the unwanted candidate. He’s kinda like if Bill Clinton ran for a U.S. Senate seat after the “Me, Too” movement.

Who was the prominent black candidate in the race? There were a few not prominent ones.

Who was the prominent Latino candidate?

My point is Mamdani won the primary; he didn’t beat a strong field.

Since Mamdani is the Democratic candidate, he has a great shot at winning the General Election.

Eric Adams is running as an Independent. He’s a tarnished candidate.

There’s a boring ass white guy who was a federal prosecutor, IIRC, and for about 20 years a successful corporate attorney.

Then, there is Curtis Sliwa, a right-wing loon who will run on law-and-order, anti-immigration, and a “white working class” type of populism - not racism (it’s NYC)….it’ll be aggrievement.

I just heard Mamdani say he’ll make NYC more affordable and SAFER. I guarantee that if Sliwa runs, it’ll include make NYC safer.

Now, if Sliwa drops out and the boring ass white lawyer gets the GOP nomination, it could get interesting.

Wanted to add: a huge percentage of Cuomo’s pro-vote was that voters knew who he was in a race of either unknowns or boring ass politicians no one cares about. A huge percentage of the anti-Cuomo voters didn’t like him at all.
 
Last edited:
Paine said:
You’re mostly just reframing points I’ve already acknowledged. Yes, Cuomo had baggage. Yes, name recognition played a role. Yes, Mamdani didn’t face a “perfect” field. That’s true in most elections. But if the lesson here is that Mamdani only won because voters hated Cuomo and the field was weak, then you’re ignoring what made his campaign distinctive.

He didn’t just ride anti-Cuomo sentiment. He surged by organizing around material needs: housing, transit, care, and economic justice, whether or not voters used those exact words. That message broke through because it was clear, grounded, and connected across communities. You don’t go from 1% to winning citywide on vibes alone.

As for the MAGA comparison, spare me the semantic hair-splitting. When he says I’m “embarrassing myself” and “in MAGA land,” he’s not engaged in good-faith critique. He’s trying to discredit a political argument by smearing it as irrational, unserious, or beneath consideration. That posture is exactly the problem.
Click to expand...
One thing is for certain, Mamdani’s 4-point platform is a dead man walking.

No one is bringing about a huge construction of low-to-moderate cost housing……mayoral candidates have promised that for decades. Building in NYC is EXPENSIVE.

Better “care?” Healthcare? Rehab care? Aged care? Gonna need the federal government.

Free buses? Why not free subways? 1.4 million ride buses each day….4 million ride subways.

How does one pay for the transportation system without rider revenue?
 
Paine said:
First of all, Mamdani doesn’t have a “four-point platform.” That was just shorthand. If you want to know what he actually ran on, it’s all public: freeze rents for stabilized units, make buses fast and fare-free, and pilot one city-owned grocery store per borough to fight food deserts. Clear, specific, and grounded in real needs, not vague slogans.

“Better care” mainly referred to childcare. You know, the thing de Blasio made universal in NYC without federal help? Mamdani is building on that precedent, expanding access to childcare, elder care, and disability support through community-based infrastructure. That’s not utopian. It’s practical.

The subway point misses the mark. Mamdani focused on buses because they serve outer-borough, working-class riders, especially Black and brown New Yorkers, caregivers, and the elderly. It’s about equity and reliability where the need is greatest.

And how to pay for it? Raise taxes. Tax the wealthy, close loopholes for luxury developers, shift budget priorities. This isn’t fantasy; it’s already reflected in proposals backed by aligned legislators.

If you’re going to dismiss a platform, at least learn what’s in it. Otherwise, you’re not critiquing Mamdani, you’re critiquing a caricature.
Click to expand...
How do you make buses fast in a low-cost, safe way?

When I was your age I’d have thought free buses in NYC a GREAT IDEA.
 
My guess is the point of his campaign is to get elected.

To do so, he’s overpromised.

Let’s see if he delivers. I doubt he will.
 
Zoo_View said:
My guess is the point of his campaign is to get elected.

To do so, he’s overpromised.

Let’s see if he delivers. I doubt he will.
Click to expand...
Kind of like I promised a taco bar in the cafeteria to win my high school class president election.
 
Paine said:
I agree with avoiding purity tests. A Democrat in Arkansas won’t have the same platform as one in Queens. But what can unify us is a shared ethos: solidarity, empathy, and organizing around people’s lived material needs. That’s what Mamdani tapped into. Not a rigid national template, but a locally grounded movement with universal values.
Click to expand...
On those points we agree. I commented two weeks ago that I liked Mamdani when you linked the first video. I also said that I think that some of what he said was merely pandering but every politician does that too.

My biggest worry with your sentiment is that I find it hard to find "universal values" in our society. We are so divergent, disjointed, and just plain awful to each other that it's hard to find anything universal. For example, you propose raising wages and there will undoubtedly be huge numbers of blue collar workers who fight you because their wages aren't being raised the most or not singled out enough for them. As a society we are so lacking in empathy that it's hard to find anything positive that's universal.
 
Icky Mettle said:
Yep. Republicans absolutely LOVE the idea of him becoming NYC’s mayor. And I’m not saying then because anything is actually wrong with him. But he does check almost every box of how republicans stereotype and caricature democrats to scare a substantial portion of American voters.
Click to expand...
Heck yeah I’m pulling for this guy to win. I’m staying out of this discussion but can you please, PLEASE discuss the City owned and operated grocery stores proposal? Seems like a back-to-the- 1930s type idea. I’ll hang up and listen.
 
Paine said:
Mamdani gained traction where organizing infrastructure exists and where his message reached people. Bed-Stuy and Park Slope didn’t go for him despite rent issues, they went for him because the left has a real presence there. The rent freeze wasn’t aimed at wealthy co-ops. It was part of a broader message about dignity for working people. Same with transit: it wasn’t just about bus routes in Greenwood, it was a citywide call for free and reliable service.

Your rent freeze point flips basic politics on its head. The people paying the highest rents aren’t usually the ones demanding rent freezes, they’re the ones least likely to be impacted. The rent freeze resonated most where renters are vulnerable, where tenant organizing is strong, and where people are struggling with rent hikes, not in the wealthiest ZIP codes.

You even said you were surprised that East Flatbush went for Cuomo, when anyone with a basic grasp of the race knew that Cuomo’s base of support came largely from Black voters. That’s not some niche local insight; it was one of the most widely reported dynamics of the primary. Acting like this disproves Mamdani’s message just shows how disconnected your frame is from actual organizing and political reality.

As for your “eyeball analysis." you don’t even live in NYC anymore. Meanwhile, plenty of actual New Yorkers, including journalists and organizers, have made the same points I’m making. That two board posters disagree with me doesn’t invalidate the broader takeaway. You keep leaning on lived experience, but apparently only yours counts.

If all this leads you to call me MAGA and say I’m embarrassing myself, maybe it’s because the argument isn’t going your way, and you know it.
Click to expand...
1. I didn't call you MAGA. I said you were using MAGA logic -- that is, you try to twist every counter-argument as actually an argument in your favor. From what I observe, you've twisted every objection to your analysis into somehow support for your analysis. It's farcical. I didn't get where I did by making arguments that help the other side for lack of comprehension. Neither did the other posters whose objections you've attempted to subsume within your theory. You say that Marcuse is dead, but you're doing a great impression of the One Dimensional Man.

2. For instance: I understand rent freezes. I'm not flipping basic politics on its head. Rather, my point -- which you seem to have missed -- is that support for Mamdani doesn't actually seem to track the vulnerability of renters. Now, we have only neighborhood level data, and I'm not sure where those neighborhoods are defined. Maybe when someone looks in more detail, they will find that within each neighborhood, there was a correlation between rent vulnerability and thus Mamdami's message was heard, received and embraced. But the data we have now does not show that. Your hypothesis is unsupported.

I mean, what about me suggests that I can't understand the politics of rent? Do you really think that I don't know my ass from a hole in the ground. Is it our conversations about the Frankfurt School of post-Marxist social theory? My careful explanations of legal doctrines and analyses of Supreme Court opinions? Maybe it's my financial literacy. And for that matter, what about the other posters from NYC suggests that they are stupid and unthinking? You've been trying to contend that all of our objections are actually support, which is to say that you're accusing us of idiocy.

Pro tip: when you're in a room with smart people, and you're asserting X while everyone else is saying Y, and then you come back and say, "actually Y proves X" -- do you think the most likely explanation is that the rest of the people don't get it, or that you're not getting something?

3. I'm not leaning on lived experience nor am I making only my experience count. You might have noticed that I've expressed no opinion of my own on Mamdani's victory. I don't know. I would want to wait for more data. I'd like more testimonials from people on the ground. I'm only pushing back at your lecturing tone, because it strikes me as unseemly when directed at people who know way more about it than you. You said you visited New York once. La di fucking da.

My examples aren't meant to be unassailable, but rather to show how knowledge of the city can lend insights that maybe an outsider wouldn't grasp. For instance, Cuomo's base of support was among black people? Well, funny that -- again, that doesn't neatly match up with the election results. He appears to have killed it in East Brooklyn overall. He did poorly in Bed-Stuy, also full of black residents (though not as much as before). Maybe Cuomo won the black parts of Bed-Stuy and Mamdani with the white hipsters spilling over from neighboring areas. I don't know. Neither do you.

Note that according to the Times, Cuomo outperformed Mamdani in lower income neighborhoods, 49-38. Maybe that's just a reflection of the socioeconomic status of black people in New York -- Eastern Brooklyn being generally low income. But maybe not. It certainly doesn't advance your argument about material interests. Mamdami did better with upscale progressives than low income people -- in other words, what you'd expect in today's politics.

4. To my eye, the pattern was: Mamdani cleaned up with Asian voters, unsurprisingly. Cuomo won almost every vote in the Orthodox Jewish neighborhoods (seriously -- the margins were 90% or higher). Mamdani won the progressive enclaves and the hipster areas. Lower income and black neighborhoods went for Cuomo. Nothing about these cross tabs supports your grand theory of the race. You say it wasn't about bus routes only in Greenwood -- well, duh. Did you think that I was saying he proposed a bus route system at the neighborhood level? I said that mileage may vary on how important bus routes are to you. When I lived in Park Slope, I never took the bus. I never had to; subway was great there. Had I lived 30 blocks to the south, that wouldn't necessarily be true.

This pattern is not proving your point. It's not disproving your point, either. It shows a complicated picture, some of which is unique to New York.

As for journalists and other observers, sure they can have their opinions. I'm not dismissing them. I'm just suggesting that you not be dismissive of other posters when you are making empirical claims that you can't back up. I wouldn't have thought this to be controversial.

5. Neighborhoods do change pretty quickly in NYC and I haven't been there for a while. For instance, in reading for this post, I learned that Canarsie -- once an outpost of the white working class -- had gradually become a West Indian neighborhood. Not that I ever spent much time in Canarsie, but I'd been there a few times. Bensonhurt, by contrast, remains a white working class outpost (probably a lot of Italians still) but white people are actually slightly outnumbered there by Asians. So yeah, I was a bit surprised about East Flatbush because a) I would have thought there was more progressive sentiment and b) the problems Mamdani was addressing are especially acute there. Turns out I wasn't right.
 
Terrible move. Defeat his budget busting, dangerous policies at the ballot box.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top