Ranking a man who shut down Indian Point, transferred MTA funds to fund an upstate ski resort, prioritized glam projects over nuts and bolts fixes, interfered in NYCs COVID response because he didn’t like deblasio, harassed women is extremely disappointing. I can’t believe you’ve written in support of him
Cuomo is a defender of Elizabeth Street Garden! He is entirely opposed to our agenda is it is quite confusing to prefer him over a candidate whose worst policies have little chance of materializing.
Personally, I don’t find opposition to Zohran to be a compelling reason to rank Cuomo at all. Cuomo is unacceptable as someone who has used tens of millions of NY taxpayer dollars covering his legal fees and will be easily blackmailed by the Trump admin (the DOJ is actively investigating him). We don’t need another Eric Adams. Cuomo is unfit for office.
I have a similar ranking to you, but I’ll be ranking Mamdani fifth. Moral character is in my view a highly salient feature of a leader, such that Cuomo’s bad moral character outweighs for me Mamdani’s bad policy. (I also think, incidentally, that Mamdani would be constrained by reality—as you point out, some of his worst proposals depend on an Albany that is unlikely to cooperate.) I do not think this is letting passion overwhelm reason; it’s just a theory of good governance—a theory that I think Lincoln, incidentally, illustrates by example. He was a canny politician and very personally ambitious, and no doubt both of these contributed to his success as a president. But I also think he would not have been so good a leader, would perhaps not have gotten the nation through the war, had he not had real principles.
The expulsion of Cuomo from public life was a tremendous victory. The principle that people like him should have no place in public office is a good one and I feel, as a Democrat, genuinely ashamed that my party’s leadership has collaborated or acquiesced in a Cuomo comeback. If he wins the nomination I may well cast my first ever protest vote in a contested race. (It already being my policy to cast write-in votes in uncontested races.)
Seeing you support the anti-congestion pricing, anti-nuclear, anti-transit candidate is disappointing. This kind of purity politics is why Democrats keep losing.
This is so well-written and well-researched - I would expect nothing less from you! Our opinions definitely differ a bit, but I so appreciate reading about the candidates from your point of view.
Thank you for writing an informative and well-considered perspective.
I appreciate that you used no cheap shots, and especially that there is no hint of the fear or outrage or despair which are so often and clumsily used to make the case for someone's preferred candidate (or more commonly and even more viciously, AGAINST someone's dispreferred candidate).
• Tackle the affordability crisis, especially housing, which is crushing all but the richest New Yorkers.
• Cut crime 50% by investing in the communities in which most crime occurs, hiring 5,000 more police officers, and making crime illegal again.
• End street homelessness by forbidding it – and expanding and improving our shelter system. It’s not normal and it’s not acceptable that more than 4,000 people are sleeping on the streets every night. They are suffering and it’s incredibly dangerous for them – and for all of us.
I'm astounded by this new line of center-liberal discourse that seems to be gaining speed in the final days of this primary: "Cuomo and Mamdani are actually equally bad, and if you think about it, Mamdani is kinda worse!"
The conclusion that a campaign promise of a rent freeze is a threat of lawless tyranny seems a WILD stretch to me, and a symptom of Fear of a Leftist Planet.
The preservation of entrenched power structures relies upon the rejection that Democratic Socialist policies have merit -- when have we EVER given Socialist principles a chance on a major political stage much less the endless chances (and failures) we've permitted of Center Left policies?
We can shit on de Blasio all day (and so will i!), but what is his #1 legacy that all New Yorkers can agree upon enthusiastically? All together now: UNIVERSAL 3K! Which also happens to be the most Socialist thing to happen to this city in a while.
Meanwhile: continuing the Bloombergian principle of prioritizing making NYC as hospitable as possible to a rich tax base will surely succeed, at the expense of making it unlivable for almost everyone else. With Democrats like this, who needs Republicans?
Appreciate the honesty and reasoning of this post Daniel. It certainly has made me take a harder look at my own rankings, though I worry for the same reason over Cuomo’s disregard for policy legality and government ethics given his past actions. One thing I’m also curious about is how you’d place Eric Adams relative to these “last-choice” candidates in the general, though the time for that isn’t quite yet.
And regarding Adams, let’s see how the post-primary campaign plays out. I’ll almost certainly have a political club meeting so we can all discuss in person.
I think you've made some excellent points, but disagreeing with Mamdani's positions doesn't excuse ranking Cuomo. In addition to Cuomo having no compelling plans for the city and a pretty crappy track record, his treatment of women on his staff is completely disqualifying. "Ms. Commisso said Mr. Cuomo grabbed her buttocks; reached under her blouse and fondled her breast; held her in close, intimate hugs; and asked her about her relationship with her husband, including whether she had ever “fooled around” or had sex with anyone else. She recalled his saying something to the effect of “if you were single, the things I would do to you,” and said he once complimented her on showing “some leg.” https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/06/06/nyregion/andrew-cuomo-sexual-harassment-claims.html
I live in terror of the day that the c-suite at my company decides it’s time to pull up stakes and move office to some shithole in a sweaty highway-choked Sunbelt ‘city’, and my vote will always be structured to delay that day. So I’m also a Tilson #1, Cuomo #5, NO to Mamdani. I would sooner see Cuomo in prison than in the mayor’s office, but the voters have really f***ed this one up, and allowed Cuomo’s name recognition serve as the Schelling Point for the broad anti-socialist coalition that united around Adams, Bloomberg…
In addition to calling out the voters, I’ll also do something I rarely do and criticize Bloomberg here - a last minute Cuomo endorsement? Really, that’s the best you could do?? Your influence and money might have unified the field around someone good months ago, had you chosen to apply it… where’s Doctoroff? Sheekey? Where’s your successor, Mike??
I don't agree about mayoral promise on freezing rent. It's not illegal and you can read State SC ruling on it last time it was a freeze?
There are couple of reasons why:
- Candidates promise is just a promise, it might not happen because rent board chooses so
- The law while stating the balancing act, doesn't instruct how exactly this balancing act should be done. There is a chance that at this particular moment cost of living element of the balance is the most important and should be overweight (and here's a hint - electing Zohran does support this premise)
- The mayor does have full control over electing the people on the board, it's for sure lawful activity, and this choice always does bring level of bias from the mayor. Pretend otherwise is just to pretend.
One might argue that freezing the rent because landlords are bastards is somewhat illegal (no such reason in statue) and wouldn't stand in court, but freezing the rent because we have affordability crisis is probably legal especially if supported by numbers. More importantly we'll see how legal it is in courts if we ever get to this point.
Far left (actually just socialist) populist might be not great, but for sure way better than status quo low morality character politician. At least this one might get things better for majority of people (or do nothing if limited by state & courts).
I agree with this almost entirely, but why isn't Stringer ranked? He has a great deal of experience and has signaled some level of seriousness on public safety, housing, and education. Adrienne Adams strikes me as deeply unserious on public safety (see Vital City's crime forum), hostile to public transportation and safer streets, and generally a creature of NYC machine politics that's been failing for years. Stringer polls about as well as Adams and Lander and has a base of support that's independent of the WFP and its clown-car RCV strategy. Ranking Tilson first as a signaling strategy makes sense, even though he polls at 1%, since it won't affect the outcome anyway. But Stringer seems to me to be directionally closer to your priorities and remains viable in the later rounds of RCV, while also not being accountable to the groups like Lander or the Queens machine, like Adrienne Adams.
My ranking will likely be: 1. Myrie, 2. Stringer, and 3. Cuomo, unless a major surprise comes along in the next few days.
Ranking a man who shut down Indian Point, transferred MTA funds to fund an upstate ski resort, prioritized glam projects over nuts and bolts fixes, interfered in NYCs COVID response because he didn’t like deblasio, harassed women is extremely disappointing. I can’t believe you’ve written in support of him
Cuomo is a defender of Elizabeth Street Garden! He is entirely opposed to our agenda is it is quite confusing to prefer him over a candidate whose worst policies have little chance of materializing.
Personally, I don’t find opposition to Zohran to be a compelling reason to rank Cuomo at all. Cuomo is unacceptable as someone who has used tens of millions of NY taxpayer dollars covering his legal fees and will be easily blackmailed by the Trump admin (the DOJ is actively investigating him). We don’t need another Eric Adams. Cuomo is unfit for office.
I have a similar ranking to you, but I’ll be ranking Mamdani fifth. Moral character is in my view a highly salient feature of a leader, such that Cuomo’s bad moral character outweighs for me Mamdani’s bad policy. (I also think, incidentally, that Mamdani would be constrained by reality—as you point out, some of his worst proposals depend on an Albany that is unlikely to cooperate.) I do not think this is letting passion overwhelm reason; it’s just a theory of good governance—a theory that I think Lincoln, incidentally, illustrates by example. He was a canny politician and very personally ambitious, and no doubt both of these contributed to his success as a president. But I also think he would not have been so good a leader, would perhaps not have gotten the nation through the war, had he not had real principles.
The expulsion of Cuomo from public life was a tremendous victory. The principle that people like him should have no place in public office is a good one and I feel, as a Democrat, genuinely ashamed that my party’s leadership has collaborated or acquiesced in a Cuomo comeback. If he wins the nomination I may well cast my first ever protest vote in a contested race. (It already being my policy to cast write-in votes in uncontested races.)
Seeing you support the anti-congestion pricing, anti-nuclear, anti-transit candidate is disappointing. This kind of purity politics is why Democrats keep losing.
Are you referring to Whit here?
This is so well-written and well-researched - I would expect nothing less from you! Our opinions definitely differ a bit, but I so appreciate reading about the candidates from your point of view.
I appreciate the smart criticism of Zohran. I haven't been able to find much of that elsewhere. This has definitely changed my ranking.
Thanks for the kind words, and thanks for reading. “Smart criticism” was the goal, even if people don’t ultimately agree with the conclusion.
Thank you for writing an informative and well-considered perspective.
I appreciate that you used no cheap shots, and especially that there is no hint of the fear or outrage or despair which are so often and clumsily used to make the case for someone's preferred candidate (or more commonly and even more viciously, AGAINST someone's dispreferred candidate).
This is Tilson's agenda in his own words. My favorite is, "Fix our public schools." Sure?
• Revitalize our economy, creating wealth, prosperity, jobs, and higher wages.
• Tackle the affordability crisis, especially housing, which is crushing all but the richest New Yorkers.
• Cut crime 50% by investing in the communities in which most crime occurs, hiring 5,000 more police officers, and making crime illegal again.
• End street homelessness by forbidding it – and expanding and improving our shelter system. It’s not normal and it’s not acceptable that more than 4,000 people are sleeping on the streets every night. They are suffering and it’s incredibly dangerous for them – and for all of us.
• Fix our public schools.
Making crime (and homelessness) illegal! That'll do it!
I'm astounded by this new line of center-liberal discourse that seems to be gaining speed in the final days of this primary: "Cuomo and Mamdani are actually equally bad, and if you think about it, Mamdani is kinda worse!"
The conclusion that a campaign promise of a rent freeze is a threat of lawless tyranny seems a WILD stretch to me, and a symptom of Fear of a Leftist Planet.
The preservation of entrenched power structures relies upon the rejection that Democratic Socialist policies have merit -- when have we EVER given Socialist principles a chance on a major political stage much less the endless chances (and failures) we've permitted of Center Left policies?
We can shit on de Blasio all day (and so will i!), but what is his #1 legacy that all New Yorkers can agree upon enthusiastically? All together now: UNIVERSAL 3K! Which also happens to be the most Socialist thing to happen to this city in a while.
Meanwhile: continuing the Bloombergian principle of prioritizing making NYC as hospitable as possible to a rich tax base will surely succeed, at the expense of making it unlivable for almost everyone else. With Democrats like this, who needs Republicans?
Appreciate the honesty and reasoning of this post Daniel. It certainly has made me take a harder look at my own rankings, though I worry for the same reason over Cuomo’s disregard for policy legality and government ethics given his past actions. One thing I’m also curious about is how you’d place Eric Adams relative to these “last-choice” candidates in the general, though the time for that isn’t quite yet.
Right there with you regarding Cuomo’s past.
And regarding Adams, let’s see how the post-primary campaign plays out. I’ll almost certainly have a political club meeting so we can all discuss in person.
I think you've made some excellent points, but disagreeing with Mamdani's positions doesn't excuse ranking Cuomo. In addition to Cuomo having no compelling plans for the city and a pretty crappy track record, his treatment of women on his staff is completely disqualifying. "Ms. Commisso said Mr. Cuomo grabbed her buttocks; reached under her blouse and fondled her breast; held her in close, intimate hugs; and asked her about her relationship with her husband, including whether she had ever “fooled around” or had sex with anyone else. She recalled his saying something to the effect of “if you were single, the things I would do to you,” and said he once complimented her on showing “some leg.” https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/06/06/nyregion/andrew-cuomo-sexual-harassment-claims.html
I live in terror of the day that the c-suite at my company decides it’s time to pull up stakes and move office to some shithole in a sweaty highway-choked Sunbelt ‘city’, and my vote will always be structured to delay that day. So I’m also a Tilson #1, Cuomo #5, NO to Mamdani. I would sooner see Cuomo in prison than in the mayor’s office, but the voters have really f***ed this one up, and allowed Cuomo’s name recognition serve as the Schelling Point for the broad anti-socialist coalition that united around Adams, Bloomberg…
In addition to calling out the voters, I’ll also do something I rarely do and criticize Bloomberg here - a last minute Cuomo endorsement? Really, that’s the best you could do?? Your influence and money might have unified the field around someone good months ago, had you chosen to apply it… where’s Doctoroff? Sheekey? Where’s your successor, Mike??
Sober, pragmatic, and forceful analysis. This is an excellent contribution to civic discourse!
I strive for no less 🫡
An absolutely fantastic post! Thank you so much for writing and sharing this.
I don't agree about mayoral promise on freezing rent. It's not illegal and you can read State SC ruling on it last time it was a freeze?
There are couple of reasons why:
- Candidates promise is just a promise, it might not happen because rent board chooses so
- The law while stating the balancing act, doesn't instruct how exactly this balancing act should be done. There is a chance that at this particular moment cost of living element of the balance is the most important and should be overweight (and here's a hint - electing Zohran does support this premise)
- The mayor does have full control over electing the people on the board, it's for sure lawful activity, and this choice always does bring level of bias from the mayor. Pretend otherwise is just to pretend.
One might argue that freezing the rent because landlords are bastards is somewhat illegal (no such reason in statue) and wouldn't stand in court, but freezing the rent because we have affordability crisis is probably legal especially if supported by numbers. More importantly we'll see how legal it is in courts if we ever get to this point.
Far left (actually just socialist) populist might be not great, but for sure way better than status quo low morality character politician. At least this one might get things better for majority of people (or do nothing if limited by state & courts).
I agree with this almost entirely, but why isn't Stringer ranked? He has a great deal of experience and has signaled some level of seriousness on public safety, housing, and education. Adrienne Adams strikes me as deeply unserious on public safety (see Vital City's crime forum), hostile to public transportation and safer streets, and generally a creature of NYC machine politics that's been failing for years. Stringer polls about as well as Adams and Lander and has a base of support that's independent of the WFP and its clown-car RCV strategy. Ranking Tilson first as a signaling strategy makes sense, even though he polls at 1%, since it won't affect the outcome anyway. But Stringer seems to me to be directionally closer to your priorities and remains viable in the later rounds of RCV, while also not being accountable to the groups like Lander or the Queens machine, like Adrienne Adams.
My ranking will likely be: 1. Myrie, 2. Stringer, and 3. Cuomo, unless a major surprise comes along in the next few days.