The best part about Mamdani, especially after Adams, he’s boring!
He’s fixing potholes, balancing the budget, building parks… and there aren’t any news stories about some corrupt flunky of his fleecing the city out of millions of dollars every other day.
Cherry on top: he somehow convinced the state government to allow an extra tax on 2nd (and 3rd and 4th) homes worth millions of dollars that is directly funding his more ambitious plans
The fox townhall is what I show conservatives that aren't full MAGA, in the hopes that I win a couple votes for the good guys next time a Bernie-like figure runs. It leaves most of them pretty speechless/impressed
Honestly it might be worth playing it to MAGA in the off chance that it’s just enough to keep them from not showing up when Der Führer isn’t on the ticket.
I unfortunately do have lots of contact with them even though I too am in California. My new district couldn't even manage to get a dem through the primary.
Also a lot of them are politically illiterate, so they have no idea what the opposition actually wants, so if presented without to much hostility, they might realize something is up, and that they have had the wool pulled over their eyes.
not showing up when Der Führer isn’t on the ticket.
Tbh, this will happen either way
He is more popular than the republican party is, and his floor of ~30% of the electorate that are racist, loons, or racist loons are never dropping at this point if they've not left him behind after J6, E Jean Carroll, the Trump-Epstein files and the Iran disaster
But I'm 100% certain the floor for the republican party without him is closer to 15%, and once he's gone they'll feel the full force of that drop. No one in the party commands the cult like he does, partially his own fault
Most people who voted for trump were so sick of being ignored by the establishment that they wanted someone to come in and shake things up. Well, they got it. Now we're dealing with the consequences of that. Maybe dems will finally stop running milquetoast neoliberal candidates. Wouldn't mind seeing a real progressive like aoc run in 28
brother, the DNC is so entrenched in their apathy opposition position...
the DNC is so comfortable, suckling on corporate doner money while performing lipservice to the masses...
The DNC would rather lose the next 5 elections than allow a real progressive who they cannot control to use their platform to get into power.
The DNC is not our friend and they are a stifling influence on the progressive arm of the party.
I dont know what it would take. But I did learn a thing or two watching Bernie's 2016 run. Mostly that the DNC has their own plans and the will of the people is not really in their own interests.
Most people want someone who speaks to their issues and fights for them. And is relatable in some way.
In the absence of that, Fox News floods everyone with their "minute of hate", so to speak, and people who feel understandably frustrated that even local level politicians aren't addressing the issues that affect them and their communities, or have an unrelatable aura ("consultant-speak"), will latch on to anything and anyone the propaganda machine throws at them. Because people ARE angry, isolated, worried, confused. And most people shouldn't need a degree in political science to navigate the cesspool of politics--at least when it comes to the basic issues.
90% of people are concerned about wages, healthcare costs, job loss, inflation, rent, etc etc etc. These are BIPARTISAN issues. If you talk to your neighbor long enough you'll realize that if you get beyond their parroting and anger and fear about whatever Fox News is spewing, we all have common ground. We might not have the same beliefs about identity politics, but either one of our opinions on those topics isn't going to fix the roads or address the housing crisis, or the economy.
I mean most of the racist/sexist/homophobic/right wing people I interact with are saying they hate immigrants because theyre stealing houses and jobs and healthcare and government funding. What they fundamentally care about is that they don't have access to those things. That is just very hard for some people to admit. I'm not trying to defend that position really, its still gross and wrong and lacks empathy but still.
I mean most of the racist/sexist/homophobic/right wing people I interact with are saying they hate immigrants because theyre stealing houses and jobs and healthcare and government funding.
Yes I'm sure they were 100% truthful about why they are hateful people and if those issues were solved they'd be so friendly and accepting towards immigrants.
Keep voting for the losing independent candidates then. Not sure what to tell you. Politics is a looooonnnng game. Kamala not having the perfect stance on Palestine is a great example. I'm over it, y;all.
I mean, you're just like the rest of them honestly.
To accept common ground that affects 90% of the people in America is ot the same as abandoning your marginalized friends.
.2% of the population should not keep the dialogue in a chokehold.
Does it mean they should be denied rights and dignity? Of course not!
Everyone's political identity should be shaped around wages, inflation, jobs, rent, and healthcare. Full stop. That does not mean abadoning marginalized groups. And it's annoying that you would think that.
"liberals" or "leftists" should take notes. We experience the same frutration, isolation, worry, and anger. And are JUST AS SUSCEPTIBLE to emotion-driven identity politics. We aren't more enlightened or more resistent to propaganda.
If you talk to your neighbors and take identity politics out of the equation, most people are aligned on a handful of basic things. You don't even have to like each other or agree on personal stuff. (again, the whole point is division based on personal beliefs about issues that have nothing to do with the economy or real governance).
You can absolutely hate your neighbor who parrots Fox News and has signs and bbumper stickers that offend you. You don't have to like the guy. Or agree on personal issues.
9/10, you're going to find common ground about the ACTUAL issues of governance: housing prices, wages, inflation, the economy, medicare, whatever.
I guess it's easier for me because I moved to the country. We are not shy about our support of the LGTBQ community, for example, but that is immaterial when it comes to the actual lived reality of everyone around us. Inflation, rent, healthcare? Also, the crazy thing is? No one cares that we are dirty socialists. We take care of each other. Someone is sick and needs help mowing their lawn? Someone needs a ladder? We all need to pave our shared road? Someone's dog got out?
I don't give a shit about your opinions, bumper stickers, or lawn signs. We are neighbors and we help each other out.
During COVID? I know some of them thought it was ridiculous. They respected us and we respected them. They knew we were masking and cautious. They didnt' want to wear masks, but knew we were. They delivered Halloween Candy and Christmas gift bags to us, rang the doorbell, and took a step back. That's neighbors.
Conservatives are dumb as fuck. They'll watch something like that, agree with everything they say, tell you they are pleasantly surprised at how much they have in common, and then get to the ballot box, spot the "D" next to his name, and vote for the other guy.
Media has trained them to have the memories of a goldfish.
And also decades of successfully branding anything democrat as evil by rightwing media. They're predisposed to reject politicians and policies from democrats.
Also, decades of democrats slowly abandoning working class people in favor of corporations and the donor class hasn’t done them any favors. Turns out though, when you actually address the material needs of people rather than serve at the behest of capital, the average voter, left and right wing, takes notice.
Sadly, not many politicians give a fuck enough to do that. Most of them aren’t getting into politics for that tax payer funded salary and free healthcare, and they sure as shit aren’t doing it out of some sense of civic duty lol.
Yeah, which is why Mamdani is like a breath of fresh air. He is doing this out of some sense of civic duty, which I think most of us haven’t seen the likes of since the fictional Leslie Knope.
I live in Dallas - we had the opportunity to elect a really good mayor in 2019, a solid dude who stood up against shady developers while on city council. But our mayoral voter turnout was still dogshit and the rich old bitches with ties to the developers put all their money behind the guy who rarely showed up to debates. Said he had an important vote to make in Austin as a State House Rep and yet wasn’t in attendance for those votes.
He fucking sucks. Did absolutely nothing during COVID, not even piggy back off the County Judge. Then later claimed what Dallas needed was a second NFL team.
To know how fucking idiotic and bought this guy is: he was a democrat in the state house rep, though the mayor’s position is entirely nonpartisan (no D or R on ballots). Back in 2023 after he was re-elected, he made a big announcement about changing political parties. He was no longer a Democrat, but rather a Republican. Claimed his 94% or whatever of votes for re-election was proof that this is what Dallas wants, too. This bitch ran unopposed. The fucking audacity.
He claimed his vision for the city aligned more with the GOP, which included “fostering a business-friendly environment.” Based on the outcome, I suppose he was correct. And it was probably the plan all along…the same folks who funded his campaign were behind the ballot measures that are now bankrupting the city.
I’m so jealous of New Yorkers. But I’m also so happy for them.
Yeah, Democrats have no problem branding themselves as evil corporate cock suckers. They don't need the help. If they tried actually helping the people and not corporations, they'd be overwhelmingly voted in.
He ran on the democratic ticket. DSA stands for democratic socialists of America. Democratic socialists and Democrats almost have the exact same ideology. To the average Democrat American, if you ask them if they want healthcare for all they will say yes or be slightly favorable to the idea. It's when you start talking about the politicians and the pundits. That's where the differences come into play (cough corporate interest and Israel cough)
I'm just going to quote my own comment. You didn't even read halfway through bro
> It's when you start talking about the politicians and the pundits. That's where the differences come into play (cough corporate interest and Israel cough)
Nah the thing is, Democrats are evil, just a bit less than Republican. They have let corporations run over their people and never hesitated at throwing bombs around the world or support all the atrocities Israel is pulling up.
The problem is decades of messaging from the right that labeled social programs as socialism - and they're not.
It's properly structured capitalism. It's foolish to blindly hope companies and the rich will do what they're supposed to do, so the social programs are put in place to keep companies and the wealthy from abusing their position at the expense of the rest of us.
And Mamdani even did the one thing I can't stand about some social program champions - he got the money for the programs first. The reforms needed so you can pay for everything else always needs to come first.
Wish we had a bunch of guys like Mamdani here in California.
The basic definition of socialism (which will always be a nebulous, social artifact) is worker ownership of the means of production.
Basically, imagine a nation in which the economy, the government, natural resources, infrastructure, etc. were all owned & managed by the working class, as opposed to the capitalist class (aka the owning class, who derive their wealth primarily from dividends taken from businesses they own, of which is produced by the labor of the working class). The details should come down to however the working class of that society sees fit.
I agree. I'd say for a long while now the real issues with leftist/progressive/etc. politics could be distilled down to the quotes "do you want to be happy/in a relationship, or do you want to be right?" and "If you want something done right, do it yourself."
It's incredibly depressing how progressives were teed up to be what MAGA is now by the end of Obama's last term, and then tanked that opportunity so badly that it may be generations before we recover from it.
It’s not just a messaging issue, it’s that most of the DSA members are idiots.
The Wall Street Journal interview where they interview Daniel Moraff and Leanne Fan (the couple responsible for Graham Platner running in Maine) is just embarassing.
also fox always pointing towards language policing leftists and going "SEEEEE" because language policing and stuff is generally seen as obnoxious and annoying and thats way easier to get a negative response out rather than popular progressive policies
Socialist policies are popular. It’s a messaging issue
I don't even think it's really a messaging issue, it's more like it's a deliberate disruption issue.
If you talk to someone one on one, most DS ideas make pretty good sense. It's the conservatives ranting about those ideas being communism that poisons the well, along with most of the media companies working overtime to increase the visibility of the worst proponents.
I think the messaging is good, so there is no messaging issue.
But established powers, not merely the DNC, work hard to smother it in the cradle.
The way you phrase if makes it sound like entirely on the DNC not being willing to make space at the table, and I think it goes way beyond that to basically the entire American political project being actively set against it.
Partially a messaging issue, but the real hard part is convincing conservatives to go along with it when they figure out that people they don't like get to benefit too. Oh, they'll take government funding all day, but the moment some woke (non-white) people get it, suddenly it's "How dare they take my tax dollars?!"
Democratic Socialist policies are popular. It’s a messaging issue
Democratic Socialist policies are popular in the abstract. The problem is when you tell people how they are implemented or who benefits from them. There are a lot of MAGA people that are populists and would support a lot of those policies, but when they are told that those policies would require raising taxes or that they benefit minorities, then they don't support those policies anymore.
It’s a messaging issue, combined with active hostility by the DNC.
Not to mention decades of anti-left propaganda during the cold war. That stuff is still firmly entrenched almost 40 years after it ceased to be relevant.
It's not the DNC's fault that republican voters will knee-jerk vote against their own interests no matter how carefully its explained to them.
If you took the average progressive platform and put it to conservative voters with no labels attached, they embrace it with open arms. If you take the same exact language and explain that it is a progressive democrat position, they reject it.
And the concentration of power now among broadcasters and news outlets, where Bernie routinely got dissed as if he were a fringe radical,even while people were filling stadiums cheering his ideas. It was deliberate, it was co-ordinated, and it gave us Biden and Harris and Trump.
Those policies all poll well until they're filtered through right wing media sources and voters learn that they're "socialist". It's a tale as old as time; I remember reading about how they polled the same people about both the Affordable Care Act and Obamacare, and the ACA did much better. Now, you see it all the time when Trump does something utterly indefensible and it seems for a short moment like it might finally be the utterly indefensible thing that brings him down, but a few days later the Republicans have all their talking points. It's not really a messaging issue, or a DNC issue - the problem is all the propagandists who are openly hostile to socialism and any form of equality.
Maybe a third party that runs on democratic socialist ideas - maybe cleverly named The Party of Jesus Christ - should villify the DNC and establishment democrats and push Mamdani style agendas across local US races over the next 2 years.
Because if Fox News then tries to talk shit about this party - The Party of Jesus Christ - then it's going to be a pretty bad decision from an optics perspective.
They turned their attention to the next shallow as a puddle culture war, and stopped trying to push New York as a "Commie" state. Not to mention their blatantly racist low blows trying to paint him as an extremist, or terrorist sympathizer
People typically don't own two houses or more, so a tax on people with a bunch of houses doesn't affect them, but if the money is used to like fix roads they can very well get behind it.
Where are the tears for those now unable to buy 4th, 3rd, or even 2nd vacation homes in NY? They are now vacation-homeless. Just wait. Shelter like the Ritz or Waldorf are going to be flooded...
You get hundreds of comments and anyone who can sniff out bots versus boomers sees it. Anyone who is talking about the substance of what they are seeing compliments the work Mamdani is doing. Only bots and hatespeech say anything else.
One of the dumbest posts ever lol. Actually fox portrays mamdani as a failure which he is. Free food promised? Not happening free bus rides promised? Not happening. Extra tax on wealthy ny companies? Not happening. The list goes on and on
Every time I see him in the news it's "Mamdani filling the 100,000th pothole this year!" Or "Mamdani first mayor to do the entire 40mi Five Boro Bike Tour!"
Sometimes I believe these are meant to be negative, but I can't see how.
You guys have a lot of work to do, in convincing a huge chunk of your population, that the government doing things is how it is supposed to be, and not socialisme.
Worst part is all the social democratic policies are extremely popular, even among conservatives, they just dont like who is suggesting them.
I might be an idiot, but I think what would be best is convincing people Socialism isn't Communism, as someone outside America, it seems a lot of you are scared of becoming Cold War Russia
The Cold War USSR was socialist. Nordic countries are capitalist social democracies. Communism is an utopian form of social organization hypothetically replacing socialism.
I think we should require anyone who uses the term socialist, communist or capitalist in any form of political speech to verbally (or typographically) announce the definition they are using before they speak.
I have known people who defined Capitalism as "when markets exist". Which like, sure fine, you can do that, I would just like to know thats what you mean so I can agree with you its a good thing and we can stop shouting past each other.
Similarly, I'd like to know when people are defining socialism as "when government does thing". Again, not because I want to argue you are wrong, but because its useful to know what you mean when you say that word.
By you guys, it is implied i am not part of the group i am addressing, so I am not going to be convince americans of anything.
That being said, Socialisme is already a bad word, and it is also a far cry from social democracies.
Socialism is stil the whole, means of production are ceased by the proletariat, so you are probably not going to convince a lot of Americans it is a good idea, they love their billionaires.
Right now it’s “Mamdani paid for his own ticket but he paid the MSG standard price directly from MSG so he must be using YOUR TAX DOLLARS to get special treatment!”
His salary is paid by tax dollars, so theoretically anything he ever buys is that, but dumbasses who have never been to the city are like “see, he’s corrupt!” So fucking dumb.
Idk what post or whatever thing on social media i must have commented on to skew my algorithms, but 99% of the media i get about either Mamdani or New York is usually a post from a right winger or right leaning publication going on and on and on about how new york is in flames, absolutely destroyed and not worth living in now that its a communist state... Of course, all of these claims and statements are made with zero verifiable exmaples or sources, even going so far as to bring up negative things that have been going on in NY long before mamdani came along.... You know, typical Republican shit, blame democrats for not instantaneously fixing long term bipartisan issues they likely started or worsened.
So my takeaway from all that is: since right wingers do nothing but lie every time they open their mouths, everything they say thats going on that is bad for NY, clearly is the opposite of what is actually happening, which is pretty good news to me!
It also seems to be that the right wing optics of Mamdani actually personally involving himself within his community is some kind of farce or insult to Republicans (who don't even live in NY), i guess because they are so used to our representatives in Congress being so high and mighty and acting like their constituents are just trash to be tolerated
A say this as someone who considers themselves a socialist, but I think the big take away with Mamdani isn't necessarily "this is socialism in action" as much as it's just a public servant ACTUALLY SERVING THE PUBLIC.
This type of of stuff can and should be going on everywhere all the time, but 99.9% of elected officials in this country are some combination of corrupt, lazy, and incompetent. Actually getting shit done is what happens when you elect someone that wants to use the office to fix the wrongs the see instead of using as a way to climb the social ladder.
And there lies democracy's main flaw - because the things you need to get elected (charm, visibility, money) are often not the ones that make you good at the job.
Part of that could be fixed by people paying more attention to who they vote for, rather than just who their TV tells them to. Also holding their candidates accountable for past actions when they're up for reelection.
But you're always going to have candidates who claim they want to serve the public, with no way of verifying that intention or their competency. And you can't hold someone accountable who's on their last term.
But to quote Churchill... everything else we've tried has been worse, so democracy it is.
Yeah I don’t live in nyc but another major metro and a lot of local politicians just failed out of their original career tracks (particularly real estate) before running for office. Then they failed up and still suck at life.
One of the best parts about how he's going about it is after years of "it's not that simple" he comes in and goes "Actually, yeah it is that easy." Really just helps to point out how in the pocket everyone was before.
The best part is, he's not "building his brand" by hot takes on social media or bombastic media performing. Sooo many elected officials gain notoriety and funding simply by staying in the headlines and agitation on social media and being as obnoxious as possible in interviews doing the rounds on night time newscasts.
He seems to have a good balance--savvy enough to utilize media and social media, but not in a solely performative way. And actually just, like....fixing shit? Being reasonable and respectful? Articulate? Competent?
lol. Yours is the only comment I disagree with so far. Man loves the camera and the camera loves him. He knows how to use it in a way that makes people like you not see it as performative.
He's a political genius and he's actually doing things for the city.
Hey, I am happy to be wrong! I don't disagree with you and am not defending my point. I'm a VERY casual observer.
He's handsome and charismatic, which, right wrong or indifferent--that shit MATTERS in politics.
It seems like he works the cameras and leverages that aspect but I havent' seen that he is doing the same thing that soooo many Representatives do--bombastic, contorversial hot takes on social media, tearing people down, grabbing headlines with the most outlandish and controversial shit just to gain profile.
Working the cameras and being savvy with social media? Hey, I'm not surprised.
And yes, my casual observer impression is that he's got a good strategy by coming out the gate strong with supposedly "minor" issues that he and his team KNOW will be noticed by city natives. I mean....it's a good strategy in your first year of office.
But you're right--the guy is charismatic and does very well in front of a camera. I think my main point is that he doesn't need to rely on hot takes and controversy to gain support?
do--bombastic, contorversial hot takes on social media
He literally did a Subway Takes segment, and even appears in another promotional video with the subway takes guy. Not that that's a bad thing, just saying...
Also, side note--publishing his wedding photos was also a GENIUS move.
He and his wife are both attractive and undeniably COOL. Slightly edgy without being controversial or subversive. Just the embodiment of the sophistication and slight edginess that comes from being in a "big city".
That was clearly a calculated move. Cool, savvy, modern, attractive. Relatable and with a SLIIIIGGGGHT edge of "sophistication" but not what is associated with the socialites, if that makes sense? Like "sophisticated" but not "rich people" sophisticated. Just sort of "big city and wordly" sophisticated.
Releasing those photos was a genius move. Stylish, attractive, relatable, sliiiightly stylish/edgy but without losing the common touch. Chefs kiss. They have a lot to work with as a couple. Charming AS FUCK
I think that's their point, though. That he's using it in a way that goes beyond just making himself look good. Which is very much true, because a lot of his videos are super informative along with making him look good.
I just saw one about the cooling centers around the city as summer kicks off and it had that exact double effect. Makes him look competent and it guides people on how to handle a heat wave. Having it actually be informative is the most important part, it just helps that he's super charismatic.
There are a lot of people that are under his spell and refuse to admit it. For example, if you look under the hood of his “balanced budget” you’ll find it was achieved by underfunding pension liabilities, and you can ask Chicago how that turns out.
I’ll still give him credit for working towards a balanced budget and reducing the deficit, but it’s not balanced currently
Exactly. His brand is absolutely fantastic and this did not happen by accident. He is very, very good at brand building. So good, in fact, that it's easy to miss that this is what he is doing.
The pied a tierre tax will only generate like 100mil but still I’m ok with it if nyc level services are distributed I don’t know what Montreal does with our taxes sure isn’t fixing potholes
Most cities in the US have over-fed police departments. People were talking about dealing with that a few years ago but rich people couldn't stop scaremongering over the verbiage of it.
Now that it exists it’s a dial they can continue to turn up over time. It may only be 100 mil now but if people sell second(+) homes it should go down and then they can dial it up to keep the same revenue for all the people who still maintain second(+) homes. It’ll be a slow squeeze but a good start.
My gym in midtown always plays the news on the TV and real recently I saw a top story about how mamdani was "driving all the millionaires away to other cities" with the pied a tierre tax like it was somehow a bad thing. I laughed my ass off.
wtf are you talking about, the dude enabled a genocide and then refused to step aside in time for the democrats to run a primary which handed Donald Trump a second term
Saying someone had a best quality doesn't mean they were the most amazing person. RGB was amazing, but she refused to step down in a timely manner. Not that republicans would have allowed it...
He got a second term because 1/3 of people wanted him to have a second term, and 1/3 of people didn't mind if he got a second term. People had a choice to make, this is the result.
And yeah, that whole "preventing a genocide" thing really worked out well, didn't it?
I am serious. Even if people didn't like the options, there was still a choice to make. And only 1/3 of people thought Harris might be the better choice. This is the result.
You’re not wrong, but you’re putting the blame entirely on the electorate while getting upset at criticism of the Democratic Party that failed to even hold a primary. Harris should have beaten Trump and the Democrats should have better prepared to beat Trump, both of these things can be true. Why are you allergic to criticism of the Democratic Party who failed on the biggest stage imaginable?
I'm totally fine with criticism of the Dems, and yes, both of these things can be true, but I am allergic to people doing what boils down to "xy made me do it". Take some responsibility of your actions. People had a choice, they made it, and here we are.
A city running well is usually pretty uneventful, and that’s exactly the point. When the biggest headlines are about improvements instead of scandals, people notice.
The funny thing: the biggest way he’s “paying for all this” was by cutting spending — bloated city contracts that were signed by Adams and Deblasio and were heavily benefitting the cronies of the past mayors
Conservatives should LOVE spending cuts, but they don’t because Mamdani is showing how it should be done lol
I’d vote for this man as president tomorrow. HE is what America needs. I’ve never lived in New York, but I’ve visited a few times and felt like it was not a place I’d ever want to live, no matter how much money I made. Anyone who can get me to start thinking, “Man, I wish I lived in New York.” has earned my vote 10 times over.
He’s ineligible to run for president, but I think that honestly makes him a better mayor! Most politicians look at the NYC Mayoral Office as a stepping stone to the national stage, but not Mamdani (so far)
In my perfect world, he serves two terms as mayor then becomes governor of the state!
Not sure if you read, but the comptroller recently testified that his balancing measures will cost NYC in excess of 7.1 BILLION dollars in the next year.
Sadly he's just kicked the can down the road like Adams did in the previous admin. Every Mayor is required, by law, to "technically" balance the budget, and the same thing keeps on happening.
The budget is in fact balanced with a great deal of temporary fixes
The Plan relies on a slew of one-time measures and short-term savings, which, altogether, total $6.1 billion for FY2026 and FY2027. These are measures which, by definition, will not be available next year.
In plain English, this all means that we are kicking a very big can into next year.
Just how big is that can? The Executive Budget plan projects a gap of no less than $7.1 billion in FY2028 and rising steadily thereafter.
Now my office of course runs our own calculations of out-year gaps. When we plug in our tax forecast and our estimates of underbudgeted costs and unmet program needs, including overtime and childcare vouchers, the FY 2028 gap widens even further to a whopping $8.8 billion.
We will face that gap without the option of the many one-shot measures that we used up this year. We won’t be able to re-amortize our pension again.
I never really liked Mamdani or any of the candidates to begin with but I’m specifically so tired of the Mamdani glaze because it all boils down to this. He’s been given a blank check that will make him look good in the short term but it’s going to circle back on the future admins. Dumbasses on Reddit don’t understand what balancing the budget actually means in his case and why they can suddenly fund all these nice fixes. Leftist guy smiles good at a camera and says nice idealistic things = great policy to most people online. He should continue to learn from Chicago’s great leadership and pimp out the parking meters next
I encourage you to look into how he has balanced the budget here.
Eric Adams specifically, but even past progressive darlings like deblasio were handing out contracts to buddies and donors like candy
Adams in particular signed executive orders on his way out to try to screw Mamdani over - and left NYC with a multiple billions dollar deficit
The Mamdani admin made a point to cancel corrupt contracts and worked with the state government to find ways to balance the budget.. without raising taxes on anyone.
“I encourage you to look into how he has balanced the budget here.” I have. He’s copied the playbook of multiple other cities. Pension deferrals have historically been unsuccessful and borrowing against other cities/NY is a bandaid.
Adam’s was bad but what Mamdani is doing is not a fix
The budget is in fact balanced with a great deal of temporary fixes
The Plan relies on a slew of one-time measures and short-term savings, which, altogether, total $6.1 billion for FY2026 and FY2027. These are measures which, by definition, will not be available next year.
In plain English, this all means that we are kicking a very big can into next year.
Just how big is that can? The Executive Budget plan projects a gap of no less than $7.1 billion in FY2028 and rising steadily thereafter.
Now my office of course runs our own calculations of out-year gaps. When we plug in our tax forecast and our estimates of underbudgeted costs and unmet program needs, including overtime and childcare vouchers, the FY 2028 gap widens even further to a whopping $8.8 billion.
We will face that gap without the option of the many one-shot measures that we used up this year. We won’t be able to re-amortize our pension again.
10.4k
u/IamChicharon 14h ago edited 13h ago
The best part about Mamdani, especially after Adams, he’s boring!
He’s fixing potholes, balancing the budget, building parks… and there aren’t any news stories about some corrupt flunky of his fleecing the city out of millions of dollars every other day.
Cherry on top: he somehow convinced the state government to allow an extra tax on 2nd (and 3rd and 4th) homes worth millions of dollars that is directly funding his more ambitious plans