Anonymous wrote:I agree about Mamdani. I cannot take a chance with him. And the more I hear from him, the less I like him.

I also can't take Cuomo. But of the two, I have to take Cuomo. It pains me.

Unfortunately, none of the other candidates are viable. No one wants to run the biggest city in the world. And most of the lower level politicians are also awful.

I wish Garcia had won last time.

Again, I'd really encourage anyone who feels this way to take a look at Brad Lander - most recent polls suggest he's extremely viable and probably the closest thing to a Garcia equivalent in this race (Garcia was behind Wiley in first-place votes but managed to pull ahead in the next-to-last round thanks to picking up more votes from eliminated candidates like Yang), bolstered by that cross-endorsement with Mamdani. It's also still conceivable Adrienne Adams could have a late break-out - pulling ahead of Lander in the 3rd-from-last round and then picking up most of his votes - so you might consider ranking her too.

If Lander's cross-endorsement with Mamdani is a dealbreaker for you but Cuomo's MAGA donor list is not, then I would start to doubt the sincerity of your statement that you don't like Cuomo.

Also, this is ranked choice voting, so you can support one or more of these "non viable" candidates while still ultimately voting for Cuomo over Mamdani, if you feel strongly that Cuomo would be an acceptable mayor and Mamdani wouldn't. Rank 4 other candidates ahead of Cuomo - hopefully one of them being Lander - and then rank Cuomo 5th; if the final round comes down to Cuomo versus Mamdani you'll still be voting to stop Mamdani, but in the earlier rounds you'll be helping to increase the chances of somebody other than those two becoming mayor.

Were you in NY when that happened? Genuinely curious what Cuomo was supposed to do with those patients?

Yes, I was. Step one was for Cuomo to admit it when one of them died and add their deaths to the death toll. He didn't do that . From the NY Times 3/14/22:

The administration of former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo failed to publicly account for the deaths of about 4,100 nursing home residents in New York during the pandemic, according to an audit released on Tuesday by the state comptroller, Thomas P. DiNapoli.

The audit found that Health Department officials at times underreported the full death toll by as much as 50 percent from April 2020 to February 2021, as Mr. Cuomo faced increasing scrutiny over whether his administration had intentionally concealed the actual number of deaths.

He didn't report them PRECISELY because he didn't want his decision to put covid patients into rehab facilities with immunocompromised patients criticized. Now, we can argue as to whether he had other choices at the time. But LYING about their deaths is unacceptable.

First, it was incredibly demoralizing to the patients in the nursing homes who were scared out of the minds by what was going on when they knew --because they read and watch the news--that the deaths of their fellow patients were NOT being reported. That's why the patients in the public rehab facility in my neighborhood put up posters every day with the number of people who had died.

Second, Cuomo lied to enhance his own political ambitions. Read more here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_COVID-19_nursing_home_scandal

So, while you might want to argue as to whether he had better options, I hope you won't argue that leaving over 4,000 deaths out of NYC's covid death statistics is a serious offence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Brad Lander is extremely competent and knows city government and just got the NYT endorsement and you can't very well fault him on Gaza either. Also, even if you're specifically motivated by animus towards Mamdani, given that Mamdani and Lander are cross-endorsing, ranking Lander and *not* Mamdani increases the odds that Mamdani is knocked out in Lander's favor in the penultimate round, because it's going to be one of those two against Cuomo and the main thing your vote can do is influence which one.

So if you hate Mamdani but you also hate Cuomo then the logical choice is to rank Lander first, followed by four other people who aren't Mamdani and aren't Cuomo.

I actually had the opposite reaction. I was considering Lander to be on my list but him aligning with Mamdani made him a non-starter. If I want a technocrat I will take Stringer over him, even with his cringy ads.

My list is Tilson, Cuomo, Stringer, unclear (it won't go past that).

This is all a disaster. Maybe Garcia can run. Or Tisch.

Agree with the comment above about Mamdani and his apartment. Rent control/stabilization is out of control. It has its place but is way too widespread. It should be more carefully policed, have much tighter restrictions on inheritance, and should have increases at least at the level of inflation every year. Rent freezes are ridiculous. Are you not going to raise taxes on the building? Reimburse landlords for the large increases in utility costs?

Hi, are you on crack? Garcia is not running. Live in reality with the rest of us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a shame that "moderates" coalesced around somebody as shitty and toxic as Cuomo, then

I like Cuomo. I thought the SH claims were a nothing burger.

The man tried to get the gynecological records of one of his accusers. This is not okay and he is a piece of shit.

I agree about Mamdani. I cannot take a chance with him. And the more I hear from him, the less I like him.

I also can't take Cuomo. But of the two, I have to take Cuomo. It pains me.

Unfortunately, none of the other candidates are viable. No one wants to run the biggest city in the world. And most of the lower level politicians are also awful.

I wish Garcia had won last time.

Anonymous wrote:My point on Lander was this: if Cuomo is indeed flailing - as his debate performance plus the emergency cash injection from Bloomberg seem to suggest - then if your goal is to stop Mamdani, ranking Lander might more helpful than ranking Cuomo.

For example: imagine that in the second-to-last round, Cuomo has 41 votes, Mamdani has 30 and Lander has 29. Lander is knocked out by the slimmest of margins, but thanks to cross-endorsements, Mamdani gets most of his votes and easily ends up with more votes than Cuomo. Your vote for Cuomo would not change this outcome because he's too far behind; on the other hand, a single vote for Lander could make a big difference because they're so close.

(this is not all that far-fetched, see for example this recent poll https://empirereportnewyork.com/nyc-mayoral-polling-data-for-destination-tomorrow/ - Lander starts small but picks up most of the Myrie / Adams / Stringer votes and ends up almost even)

You can even rank Cuomo after Lander and still pull off this strategy - ranking Cuomo first (or only after Tilson, who's not going to make it very deep into this thing) means your vote does nothing until the final round.

I don't think Cuomo is flailing. I think a lot of people are afraid of both him and Mamdani but realize that Mamdani will destroy the city and don't want to take that risk so are holding their noses and voting for Cuomo.

As comptroller of NYC, Lander of all people should be frightened by Mamdani and what he would do to NYC's finances. The fact that he is supporting him is malpractice. If it was Mamdani vs. Sliwa or someone like that it is one thing. But all of those wish list projects don't pay for themselves. There will be zero money for schools, housing, etc. And Trump will take away all federal funding. Appreciate what you have and be pragmatic. This is not the time to live in fantasy land.

My point on Lander was this: if Cuomo is indeed flailing - as his debate performance plus the emergency cash injection from Bloomberg seem to suggest - then if your goal is to stop Mamdani, ranking Lander might more helpful than ranking Cuomo.

For example: imagine that in the second-to-last round, Cuomo has 41 votes, Mamdani has 30 and Lander has 29. Lander is knocked out by the slimmest of margins, but thanks to cross-endorsements, Mamdani gets most of his votes and easily ends up with more votes than Cuomo. Your vote for Cuomo would not change this outcome because he's too far behind; on the other hand, a single vote for Lander could make a big difference because they're so close.

(this is not all that far-fetched, see for example this recent poll https://empirereportnewyork.com/nyc-mayoral-polling-data-for-destination-tomorrow/ - Lander starts small but picks up most of the Myrie / Adams / Stringer votes and ends up almost even)

You can even rank Cuomo after Lander and still pull off this strategy - ranking Cuomo first (or only after Tilson, who's not going to make it very deep into this thing) means your vote does nothing until the final round.

Anonymous wrote:Brad Lander is extremely competent and knows city government and just got the NYT endorsement and you can't very well fault him on Gaza either. Also, even if you're specifically motivated by animus towards Mamdani, given that Mamdani and Lander are cross-endorsing, ranking Lander and *not* Mamdani increases the odds that Mamdani is knocked out in Lander's favor in the penultimate round, because it's going to be one of those two against Cuomo and the main thing your vote can do is influence which one.

So if you hate Mamdani but you also hate Cuomo then the logical choice is to rank Lander first, followed by four other people who aren't Mamdani and aren't Cuomo.

I actually had the opposite reaction. I was considering Lander to be on my list but him aligning with Mamdani made him a non-starter. If I want a technocrat I will take Stringer over him, even with his cringy ads.

My list is Tilson, Cuomo, Stringer, unclear (it won't go past that).

This is all a disaster. Maybe Garcia can run. Or Tisch.

Agree with the comment above about Mamdani and his apartment. Rent control/stabilization is out of control. It has its place but is way too widespread. It should be more carefully policed, have much tighter restrictions on inheritance, and should have increases at least at the level of inflation every year. Rent freezes are ridiculous. Are you not going to raise taxes on the building? Reimburse landlords for the large increases in utility costs?

Brad Lander is extremely competent and knows city government and just got the NYT endorsement and you can't very well fault him on Gaza either. Also, even if you're specifically motivated by animus towards Mamdani, given that Mamdani and Lander are cross-endorsing, ranking Lander and *not* Mamdani increases the odds that Mamdani is knocked out in Lander's favor in the penultimate round, because it's going to be one of those two against Cuomo and the main thing your vote can do is influence which one.

So if you hate Mamdani but you also hate Cuomo then the logical choice is to rank Lander first, followed by four other people who aren't Mamdani and aren't Cuomo.

Can’t get over the fact that Mamdani lives in subsidized apartment as a nepo baby. Less rent controlled apartments/subsidized housing, and rent would be cheaper for everyone else.

I don’t like Cuomo but the fact that Bloomberg endorsed him and De Blasio is campaigning against him, makes him potentially my first choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are living this hell in our public school now. The school won’t even teach certain parts of the NYC DOE curriculum because it is not anti racist enough. Everything is thru the lens of race. Academics do not matter, the bar is so low. If you are for advanced learning that is shamed. Just voted in my CEC election and struggled to find a candidate who even mentioned academics. The whole thing is sad and has us questioning our choice to live here.

Are in in a downtown nyc public elementary school? Considering one for my child...

I'm guessing they are in the super woke district in Brooklyn that decided to basically do a race to the bottom for the sake of "equity" and white guilt (I think it is 15)? UES and UWS publics are more progressive than I would like (I'm a moderate Democrat) but the kids still are learning the fundamentals and getting a good education. It can vary by teacher but I think the poster is being pretty melo-dramatic, though perhaps they are somewhere else. I know less about downtown schools but have heard good things about a number of them (I don't live there so can't keep track of which is which - I only have so much bandwidth and they don't really impact me).

Anonymous wrote:We are living this hell in our public school now. The school won’t even teach certain parts of the NYC DOE curriculum because it is not anti racist enough. Everything is thru the lens of race. Academics do not matter, the bar is so low. If you are for advanced learning that is shamed. Just voted in my CEC election and struggled to find a candidate who even mentioned academics. The whole thing is sad and has us questioning our choice to live here.

Are in in a downtown nyc public elementary school? Considering one for my child...

Anonymous wrote:Bloomberg is a misogynistic Republican billionaire, it's unsurprising he'd endorse Cuomo. (his career as a "Democrat" was terminated in 15 seconds by Elizabeth Warren) And he only seems like a good mayor because his immediate neighbors were Alcoholic MAGA Cop and "not so easy to find a mayor that doesn't suck shit"; having lived in NYC through the Bloomberg years, the city got richer and cleaner but also a lot more expensive and lost a good chunk of its soul.

(the last actual good mayor we had was Ed Koch, another pro-housing second-gen immigrant with no executive experience)

Completely disagree. Bloomberg was the best thing that happened to NY. The city's finances were very tenuous and he strengthened that. Cleaner is my top priority, along with safety. He also got plenty of housing built. Stop and frisk was brilliant but just executed poorly - the obsession with constantly harping on that is ridiculous. Many people in NYCHA loved the concept. I would be fine being periodically stopped if it meant they were getting the bad guys.

Mamdani's no rent increase is the most ignorant, childish idea I have ever heard. Costs are going up rapidly. Landlords should be able to recoup that cost. I would tighten the rules and enforcement of a lot of the rent regulation. Don't make it totally go away. But make fewer people eligible and enforce that. Clean up NYCHA as people deserve nicer homes but also enforce rules there so that people want to move on, so that will open up housing. And build more housing in the outer boroughs where it is cheaper. Develop Staten Island.

Bloomberg is a misogynistic Republican billionaire, it's unsurprising he'd endorse Cuomo. (his career as a "Democrat" was terminated in 15 seconds by Elizabeth Warren) And he only seems like a good mayor because his immediate neighbors were Alcoholic MAGA Cop and "not so easy to find a mayor that doesn't suck shit"; having lived in NYC through the Bloomberg years, the city got richer and cleaner but also a lot more expensive and lost a good chunk of its soul.

(the last actual good mayor we had was Ed Koch, another pro-housing second-gen immigrant with no executive experience)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I like Cuomo. I thought the SH claims were a nothing burger.

But lying about the number of people dying from coronavirus in nursing homes during the pandemic isn't. There's a public nursing home in my neighborhood. The poor people stuck inside it during the pandemic would put posters up in the window every day with the number of people who had died that day. Then we'd see the official report for our zip code saying the number of deaths. Once or twice you figured it was just an error. After a while, when the daily report for our zip code sad zero and the posters said 4 or some such number, it became apparent that the public nursing home deaths were not being reported in the daily totals.

I thought Cuomo did a great job during the pandemic until that happened.

Were you in NY when that happened? Genuinely curious what Cuomo was supposed to do with those patients?

I agree. Did he handle it perfectly? No. But one has to think of what was happening at the time. If there was a competent candidate running against him I might factor it in more but given the options, it was not egregious enough that it shifts me to one of the other bad candidates.

He was endorsed by Bloomberg, which is good for him. I thought Bloomberg was the best mayor this city has had in ages. It really upsets me how every mention of Bloomberg references stop and frisk. Was stop and frisk executed poorly? Yes. Was the actual concept a good idea? Yes. Many people in the neighborhoods targeted by stop and frisk actually were in favor of it as a concept - it made them feel safer. It is the know-it-all white do-gooders who were more troubled by it.

And the level of how bad it was is trivial compared to the numerous good things Bloomberg did for the city. But people don't want to mention any of those.

Regarding Stringer, as a fellow nebbishy Jew, I am embarrassed by him. He needs to give it up. Particularly when he tries to sound like a tough guy. Stay in your lane.