Mamdani Needs More Scrutiny
Re(https://www.wsj.com/opinion/andrew-cuomo-can-still-save-new-york-city-mamdani-mayor-race-election-2c6156b9?mod=opinion_lead_pos8)
At the heart of the New York City Mayoral election sits a debate and battle between character and policy.
On one side of the ring is Zohran Mamdani, a newcomer who is attempting to bring socialist policies into the liberal city. He first came into the spotlight after taking helm of a large and modern social media campaign. With constant videos and shorts being shot and spread, his voice, charming personality, and radical policies were put on full display for viewers across the country.
He emphasized that he wanted to bring the Democratic Party back to its working class appeal so he championed plans of raising the minimum wage to thirty dollars and freezing rent-stablilized homes. And this has shown to give him great results as he beat out Andrew Cuomo, the former New York Governor who resigned due to sexual harassment allegations, for the seat of the Democratic Nominee of New York. Despite lacking formal experience, Mamdani makes up for it in his demeanor and attitude.
On the other hand holds the only other option, the defeated Cuomo. While the Republican Nominee Curtis Silva is popular, he is largely overshadowed by the democratic face of New York and fails to maintain good polling results. Similar, but worse things can be said about Eric Adams, the current mayor and runner in the mayoral election, as he holds a swath of bad policies, scandals, and indictments under his belt.
Cuomo’s chances are not thin, however. He was only narrowly clinched by Mamdani, losing by 12% of voters, or 112,000 people, and still holds great leverage over the election. This is even more clear with the ranked-choice voting system of the mayoral election as he can team up with other candidates like Silva to edge over to victory.
The debate, and perhaps final match, is really around Mamdani and Cuomo, now fighting as an independent. Yet, in such times, policy and experience will always trump character.
Cuomo’s greatest point of contention was a history of sexual exploits, not the bill he passed that introduced ranked-choice voting. Over the course of eight years, he was proven to have sexually harassed 12 women. This led to his consequent resignation. He was also shunned for bad leadership during the start of the Covid-19 pandemic where he guided nursing homes to readmit patients who had tested positive, increasing the death count. These events have only acted like a scar since. This is even evident in Mark Penn and Andrew Stein’s op-ed comment section, a large group of people against their argument in favor of Cuomo: “He's a creep when it comes to women. He should take himself off the public stage.” But this has also led to a lot of his accomplishments being largely overwritten.
As a governor, Cuomo pushed through legalization of same-sex marriage in New York, overhauled major construction projects like terminals at LaGuardia Airport or train halls, oversaw major disaster relief programs and signed laws that raised the minimum wage to fifteen dollars. Ultimately, upstate New York benefited greatly through economic development than any governor in recent history and New York City grew rapidly. There were also many failings throughout his tenure, but what should be remembered is his triumphs.
In relation to this, Mamdani seeks to double the current minimum wage to thirty dollars, freeze rents, and establish city-owned grocery stores. The policies have been heavily criticized by economists and policy-makers. Former Obama Treasury secretary Jack Lew writes that “the policies that he’s outlined are not policies that are good for New York.”
Ultimately, Mamdani serves as the best example of who we want as a candidate, but the worst example of what solutions to bring. People choose character because they deem that in the event of an emergency, the person who is nicer and has the heart of New York City in mind will do what is best for them, the better of the two evils. But if the candidate is destined to fail from the start with a faulty plan, perhaps voting for the vile and brash, but more experienced candidate is best.
At the heart of the New York City Mayoral election sits a debate and battle between character and policy.
On one side of the ring is Zohran Mamdani, a newcomer who is attempting to bring socialist policies into the liberal city. He first came into the spotlight after taking helm of a large and modern social media campaign. With constant videos and shorts being shot and spread, his voice, charming personality, and radical policies were put on full display for viewers across the country.
He emphasized that he wanted to bring the Democratic Party back to its working class appeal so he championed plans of raising the minimum wage to thirty dollars and freezing rent-stablilized homes. And this has shown to give him great results as he beat out Andrew Cuomo, the former New York Governor who resigned due to sexual harassment allegations, for the seat of the Democratic Nominee of New York. Despite lacking formal experience, Mamdani makes up for it in his demeanor and attitude.
On the other hand holds the only other option, the defeated Cuomo. While the Republican Nominee Curtis Silva is popular, he is largely overshadowed by the democratic face of New York and fails to maintain good polling results. Similar, but worse things can be said about Eric Adams, the current mayor and runner in the mayoral election, as he holds a swath of bad policies, scandals, and indictments under his belt.
Cuomo’s chances are not thin, however. He was only narrowly clinched by Mamdani, losing by 12% of voters, or 112,000 people, and still holds great leverage over the election. This is even more clear with the ranked-choice voting system of the mayoral election as he can team up with other candidates like Silva to edge over to victory.
The debate, and perhaps final match, is really around Mamdani and Cuomo, now fighting as an independent. Yet, in such times, policy and experience will always trump character.
Cuomo’s greatest point of contention was a history of sexual exploits, not the bill he passed that introduced ranked-choice voting. Over the course of eight years, he was proven to have sexually harassed 12 women. This led to his consequent resignation. He was also shunned for bad leadership during the start of the Covid-19 pandemic where he guided nursing homes to readmit patients who had tested positive, increasing the death count. These events have only acted like a scar since. This is even evident in Mark Penn and Andrew Stein’s op-ed comment section, a large group of people against their argument in favor of Cuomo: “He's a creep when it comes to women. He should take himself off the public stage.” But this has also led to a lot of his accomplishments being largely overwritten.
As a governor, Cuomo pushed through legalization of same-sex marriage in New York, overhauled major construction projects like terminals at LaGuardia Airport or train halls, oversaw major disaster relief programs and signed laws that raised the minimum wage to fifteen dollars. Ultimately, upstate New York benefited greatly through economic development than any governor in recent history and New York City grew rapidly. There were also many failings throughout his tenure, but what should be remembered is his triumphs.
In relation to this, Mamdani seeks to double the current minimum wage to thirty dollars, freeze rents, and establish city-owned grocery stores. The policies have been heavily criticized by economists and policy-makers. Former Obama Treasury secretary Jack Lew writes that “the policies that he’s outlined are not policies that are good for New York.”
Ultimately, Mamdani serves as the best example of who we want as a candidate, but the worst example of what solutions to bring. People choose character because they deem that in the event of an emergency, the person who is nicer and has the heart of New York City in mind will do what is best for them, the better of the two evils. But if the candidate is destined to fail from the start with a faulty plan, perhaps voting for the vile and brash, but more experienced candidate is best.
Comments
Post a Comment