NYC Election Day 2025

I have said the following so many times, it sickens me. What matters isn't winning the election. What matters is what you do once elected.

Obama/Olhan/Ocasio Cortez are all the same. They were elected based on demographic changes and their party of andrew jackson (POAJ)  peers not realizing the demographic changes or underestimating the ability to generate a large voting output. 

Mamdani is the same, as the three mentioned. But, the key is after you win what will you do?

Obama gave the banking industry a pass and didn't demand from the health industry and the results were negative. Olhan + Ocasico Cortez tried a green new deal that was dysfunctional. Now Mamdani promises to lower the cost of living while being a mayor who doesn't have the ability to. Do people really think Eric Adams/Bill DeBlasio/ even Bloomberg wouldn't have liked to make NYC more affordable while doing all of what they did. It isn't because they didn't care or know, it is because it is not about the mayor alone. And the governor has a whole state to deal with who will not accept favors for NYC absent favors for albany and all others in the state.

Mamdani as I said a long time ago will be mayor of NYC, the first asian/muslim/even one of the generation names as he is 34 but he will have a terrible time at it, and what happens next? 

The key to me is will the voters who vote now vote four years from now with the same gusto. I think many will. Not because of Mamdani but demographic shifts. It isn't an accident that Mamdani is in his 30s and Sliwa and Cuomo are in their 60s. The 40s and 50s are the non believers. But the 30s and youngers in the city are the children of immigrants in a city now mostly of immigrant stock. The native american is dead. The old whites have moved out or died lessening their population. The Black Descended of Enslaved have moved out or died lessening their population. Leaving Immigrants and their children. PEople who came to a USA much different than before founded or when founded or during the war between the states or during the great white european imperial war. The modern immigrant came to the USA built by FDR/MLK and company. A USA full of biases but safe, secure, allowing for individualism unlike any country in humanity. and so, in 2025, the modern immigrant populace starting in 1965, has become large enough to stake a claim. It is a claim of ideals. A claim of the USA. Not the USA that murdered the First Peoples. Not the USA designed by White Europeans for their sole benefit. Not the USA built on enslaved Black folk. The USA with the potential to be a human country. And while every reformation has a counterreformation, and the fifty states are not the same, and no city in the USA is like NYC. I think in NYC the claim of the immigrant populace, a true rainbow of individuals bound to the allowance of individualism over religion/phenotype/gender/language/....maybe age/individual allowance will be a different voting block. Will it mean Mamdani does great as mayor? no. Being great in a bureaucracy like any team activity isn't about one person. Schrumpft will make it very hard. But, a claim will be made and two USA's  I argue are officially born. 

Mamdani on one side/SCrumpft on the other. 

 

mamdani legislation
https://aalbc.com/tc/events/event/363-zohran-mamdani-legislation/

problem with legislators in the usa
https://aalbc.com/tc/events/event/499-the-problem-with-legislators-in-the-usa/

bernie sanders
https://aalbc.com/tc/events/event/504-bernie-sanders-is-a-fiscal-capitalistic-opportunist/

The latest Economic Corner
https://aalbc.com/tc/events/event/569-economic-corner-25/

 

 

 

Fran Lebowitz joins ‘On Stage’ for a sharp and unfiltered conversation
https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/on-stage-episodes/2025/10/31/fran-lebowitz-joins--on-stage--for-a-sharp-and-unfiltered-conversation

Some thoughts
She found it interesting, that people in Stockhom Sweden were interested in the mayoral race in New York City. 
I concur that people like new faces. Obama/Schrumpt/Mamdani all used the position of one who . 
She didn't vote for Mamdani though praised him. She admitted what I said, you can't make free buses. Mamdani's stated positions don't fit. 
She made an interesting point on New York City, she likes NYC because this is the only city where all are able to live in it. She is correct. NYC has become this city of mostly individuals devoutly or modestly within a country of hardcore tribes. 

 

PROPOSITIONS 1/2/3/4/5

MY THOUGHTS
1 New York City is not part of Essex county, I don't comprehend why NYC is voting on Essex county which is at the northernmost part of the state.
2+3+4 I have lived through the Real Estate industry of NYC and I can say with 100% surety that the real estate industry is the most wicked or ugly thing I have ever seen. I really despise the real estate industry in NYC and these three propositions don't lower the damn rent, nor do they punish the real estate industry for the crimes it has done. 
5 No one explains how the DEpartment of City Planning will consider all the boroughs... the reason why each Borouch has its own mapping plan is the boroughs aren't the same, they have different peoples, different situations... 
6 I think instead of changing the date of elections it is better for the elected officials of NEw York City to simply get results, which 99% of them never do. They make a ton of laws and make a ton of speeches.

 

SHORT EXPLANATION

Ballot proposal No. 1 Amendment to allow Olympics sports complex in Essex County on state forest preserve land. This proposal, to be voted on across New York state, would allow the expansion of new ski trails in the Olympic Sports Complex in Essex County, New York. The Olympic Sport Complex is in state forest preserve land. This proposal would also require New York State to add 2,500 acres of protected forest land to Adirondack Park.  Ballot proposal No. 2 Fast-track affordable housing to building more affordable housing across the city. This proposal would create two new processes to fast-track certain affordable housing projects. The first process is for publicly financed affordable housing projects. The second process is for affordable housing projects in the 12 community districts with the lowest rates of affordable housing development.  A “yes” vote creates two processes to fast-track affordable housing projects.  A “no” vote keeps the seven-month review process, with input from the local Community Board, local Borough President, CPC, City Council, and mayor.  Ballot proposal No. 3 Simplify review of modest housing and infrastructure projects.  This proposal would create a faster review process for certain land use projects, like smaller projects to change how land is used and to prepare the city for extreme weather or other future challenges. For most of these projects, the proposed process would remove final review by the City Council.  Ballot proposal No. 4 Establish an Affordable Housing Appeals Board with City Council, borough, and citywide representation.  NYCVotes says this proposal would change the current land use review process when the City Council rejects or changes an affordable housing project. The proposal would create an Affordable Housing Appeals Board comprised of the local Borough President, Speaker of the City Council, and mayor. The proposal would allow the Appeals Board to reverse the City Council’s decision with a two-to-one vote.  Ballot proposal No. 5 Create a digital city map to modernize city operations. This proposal would make the Department of City Planning (DCP) responsible for creating, maintaining, and digitizing a single city map. Ballot proposal No. 6 Move local elections to presidential election years to increase voter participation.  This proposal would move election dates for city offices to the same year as federal presidential elections. 

 

DETAILS

2025 General Election BALLOT PROPOSALS ABSTRACT OF PROPOSAL NUMBER ONE, AN AMENDMENT Amendment to Allow Olympic Sports Complex In Essex County on State Forest Preserve Land The proposal amends the State Constitution. It permits new Nordic ski and biathlon trails in the forest preserve. Development there requires Constitutional permission. That is because the facility is in the Adirondack forest preserve. It is part of an Olympic Sports Complex in North Elba. North Elba is in Essex County, New York. The project touches up to 323 acres. The facility covers 1,039 acres. This use is offset. 2,500 new acres are added to the forest preserve. The New York Legislature must approve the offset. If not, the project will not happen. FORM OF SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL NUMBER ONE, AN AMENDMENT Amendment to Allow Olympic Sports Complex In Essex County on State Forest Preserve Land Allows skiing and related trail facilities on state forest preserve land. The site is 1,039 acres. Requires State to add 2,500 acres of new forest land in Adirondack Park. A yes vote authorizes new ski trails and related facilities in the Adirondack forest preserve. A no vote does not authorize this use. 1 Question 2 Proposed Charter Amendment: Fast Track Affordable Housing to Build More Affordable Housing Across the City Fast track publicly financed affordable housing. Fast track applications delivering affordable housing in the community districts that produce the least affordable housing, significantly reducing review time. Maintain Community Board review. “Yes” fast tracks applications at the Board of Standards and Appeals or City Planning Commission. “No” leaves affordable housing subject to longer review and final decision at City Council. 2 Ballot Question 2 Proposed Charter Amendment: Fast Track Affordable Housing to Build More Affordable Housing Across the City Abstract This proposal would create two new fast-track public processes for affordable housing: the Board of Standards and Appeals (BSA) Zoning Action for Affordable Housing Projects and the Affordable Housing Fast Track. First, the proposal would enable publicly financed affordable housing to be approved by the BSA after review by the affected Community Board. BSA would be required to make findings relating to neighborhood character and programmatic necessity. Second, the amendment would establish an expedited land use review process with review by the affected Community Board, affected Borough President, and the City Planning Commission– for zoning changes that deliver affordable housing in the 12 community districts with the lowest rate of affordable housing production. BSA Zoning Action for Affordable Housing Projects How it works: Currently, the BSA has the power to waive zoning requirements to facilitate certain affordable housing developments, but that authority is limited to projects that can meet stringent standards relating to hardship, uniqueness, and economic infeasibility. Projects that cannot meet these standards instead must go through the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) – a seven-month review process that begins with advisory opinions from the affected Community Board and Borough President, followed by review and votes at the City Planning Commission and City Council. This proposal would empower the BSA to issue project-specific approvals for publicly financed affordable housing that meet the required findings after a 60-day review by the affected Community Board and a 30-day review with a public hearing held by the BSA. Projects that do not meet the findings may receive one 60-day extension for additional studies or project modifications to seek approval at a second hearing. What types of housing are eligible: This new action would be available to companies organized exclusively to develop housing projects for persons of low 3 income, including Housing Development Fund Companies– the legal vehicle for virtually all publicly financed affordable housing projects in New York City. What factors must the Board of Standards and Appeals consider: In order to approve affordable housing pursuant to the fast-track process, the BSA would be required to make findings related to neighborhood character and programmatic necessity. The first finding ensures the project does not clash with the surrounding neighborhood character. The second finding establishes that a project requires zoning waivers in order to proceed and that the City or another governmental entity intends to provide financial backing. Affordable Housing Fast-Track How it works: Currently, affordable housing is produced unevenly throughout the City, with 12 community districts adding as much housing as the other 47 combined over the course of the last 10 years. To address this, the Affordable Housing Fast Track proposal creates an expedited approval process for projects that deliver affordable housing in the community districts that produce the least affordable housing. Under the proposal, the City would assess the rate of affordable housing production in each community district every five years, and then fast-track projects that include permanently affordable housing in the 12 Community Districts with the lowest such rates. These 12 Community Districts would be calculated by measuring the total number of affordable dwelling units created over the past five years divided by the total number of all dwelling units at the start of the five-year period. This formula measures the growth rate of affordable housing. Those twelve community districts would be determined by the Department of City Planning every five years. What types of applications are eligible: To be eligible for this fast-track procedure, an application must include permanent affordable housing under the City’s Mandatory Inclusionary Housing program and must be located in one of the twelve community districts with the lowest rate of affordable housing production. The Department of City Planning would be required to confirm that a primary purpose of the application is to facilitate additional housing and affordable housing. What is the new process for reviewing these affordable housing rezoning applications: 4 Today, rezoning applications typically go through ULURP– a seven-month review process that begins with successive advisory opinions from the affected Community Board and Borough President, followed by review and votes at the City Planning Commission and City Council. The proposed amendment would include the same opportunity for Community Board review as exists today, but with Borough President review occurring concurrently. The City Planning Commission would have 30 days to review– or 45 days for applications that require more extensive environmental review – and hold a final vote. (This element of the proposal would become effective if this ballot question is approved, regardless of whether ballot question 3, which also proposes an expedited land use review procedure, is approved.) In determining whether to approve such a rezoning application, the City Planning Commission would be required to make findings regarding the adequacy of existing transportation, sewer and other infrastructure, as well as consistency with the City’s fair housing plan (the Charter already requires the City to develop such a plan to analyze citywide data relating to fair housing). The proposal would also require the Department of City Planning and the Office of Management and Budget to consider the list of the 12 Community Districts that produce the least affordable housing and the fair housing plan in the preparation of the City’s preliminary 10-year capital strategy. Implementation: This proposed amendment would take effect immediately. 5 Question 3 Proposed Charter Amendment: Simplify Review of Modest Housing and Infrastructure Projects Simplify review of modest amounts of additional housing and minor infrastructure projects, significantly reducing review time. Maintain Community Board review, with final decision by the City Planning Commission. “Yes” simplifies review for limited land-use changes, including modest housing and minor infrastructure projects. “No” leaves these changes subject to longer review, with final decision by City Council. 6 Ballot Question 3 Proposed Charter Amendment: Simplify Review of Modest Housing and Infrastructure Projects Abstract This proposal would create an Expedited Land Use Review Procedure (ELURP) for certain land use changes and projects, including modest increases in housing capacity; acquisitions, dispositions, and certain City Map changes related to affordable housing; and infrastructure and resiliency projects, like raising the grade of a street and adding solar panels on public property. How it works: Currently, rezoning applications and other land use actions, regardless of size, must go through the City’s Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP)– a seven-month review process that begins with advisory opinions from the affected Community Board and Borough President, followed by review and votes at the City Planning Commission and City Council. This proposal would create an alternative procedure for certain rezoning applications and other land-use actions. This new process would retain the same 60-day review period for the Community Boards and a public hearing, with concurrent Borough President review. The City Planning Commission would then have 30 days to hold a public hearing and vote on the application. The City Planning Commission’s decision would be final, with no subsequent review by the City Council. For dispositions of City property to Housing Development Fund Companies – the entity for virtually all publicly financed affordable housing projects in New York City – final approval would be made by the City Council instead of the City Planning Commission. What types of projects are eligible for this expedited procedure? This expedited review procedure is reserved for specifically enumerated applications. These generally include applications relating to modest zoning changes for housing (rezoning to districts with a standard height of not more than 45 feet in lower density areas and increases in housing capacity up to 30% in medium- and high density areas); dispositions, acquisitions, and certain City Map changes for affordable housing; acquisitions and site selections for resiliency projects and open 7 space; sale of City property that is undevelopable and unusable; acquisitions for voluntary flood buyouts; and leases for solar energy on public land. Only projects that categorically lack potential significant adverse environmental impacts on communities are eligible for the expedited procedure described in this ballot question. If a project by its size or nature requires an environmental impact statement under state and local law, it will remain subject to the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure in order to receive a more extensive public and environmental review. Implementation: This proposed amendment would take effect immediately. However, it would not apply to applications that have been filed with the Department of City Planning pursuant to the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure and certified as complete before the effective date. 8 Question 4 Proposed Charter Amendment: Establish an Affordable Housing Appeals Board with Council, Borough, and Citywide Representation Establish an Affordable Housing Appeals Board with the Council Speaker, local Borough President, and Mayor to review Council actions that reject or change applications creating affordable housing. “Yes” creates the three-member Affordable Housing Appeals Board to reflect Council, borough, and citywide perspectives. “No” leaves affordable housing subject to the Mayor’s veto and final decision by City Council. 9 Ballot Question 4 Proposed Charter Amendment: Establish an Affordable Housing Appeals Board with Council, Borough, and Citywide Representation Abstract This proposal would create an Affordable Housing Appeals Board, consisting of the affected Borough President, the Speaker of the City Council, and the Mayor. This new Appeals Board would have the power to review and reverse decisions by the City Council that disapprove or modify land-use applications that directly facilitate the creation of affordable housing. The Appeals Board would replace the existing Mayoral veto, and the Council override of that veto, for these types of land-use applications. This new Appeals Board aims to strike a balance between local, boroughwide and citywide perspectives on the production of affordable housing. It does so by empowering the Speaker, affected Borough President and Mayor to review and reverse City Council decisions on land use matters affecting the development of affordable housing — but only if two out of the three members agree. How it works: Currently, certain land use actions, including rezoning applications, special permits, and others, must go through the City’s Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP)– a seven-month process that begins with advisory opinions from the affected Community Board and Borough President, followed by review and votes at the City Planning Commission and City Council. The Mayor may veto the Council’s action, and that veto is subject to an override by the Council. Under the proposal, the Affordable Housing Appeals Board would have the power to review and reverse actions of the City Council that disapprove or modify applications that directly facilitate the development of affordable housing. While much of ULURP – from the community board through City Council – would remain unchanged, the Appeals Board would be empowered to conduct a final review of these land-use applications. Land-use applications that do not relate to the development of affordable housing are not subject to the Appeals Board. The Appeals Board would consist of three members: the Speaker of the Council, the affected Borough President, and the Mayor (or a designee of each member). If at least two of the three members agree, the Board would be empowered to reverse 10 a Council disapproval or modification of a land-use application that would directly facilitate the development of additional affordable housing. Which land-use actions would be subject to the Affordable Housing Appeals Board? The Affordable Housing Appeals Board would come into play only for ULURP applications and zoning text amendments that would directly facilitate the creation of affordable housing. These include rezoning applications that are required to deliver affordable housing under the City’s Mandatory Inclusionary Housing program, as well as related actions that directly facilitate the creation of affordable housing, such as parking special permits that reduce or remove off street parking requirements that can hinder the development of affordable housing. In addition, the Appeals Board may review only applications where the land included in the application is located in a single borough. Changes not affecting affordable housing or affecting more than one borough, including citywide changes, would continue to receive the same review as they do today. When could the Affordable Housing Appeals Board act? Only applications that facilitate the creation of affordable housing that are disapproved or approved with modifications are eligible for review by the Affordable Housing Appeals Board. If an application is approved by the Council absent modifications, the Board would lack jurisdiction to review an application. In addition, no land use action would automatically go to the Appeals Board. Instead, an applicant must either appeal the Council’s decision or the Appeals Board can “call up” – or request review of – an application. The Appeals Board would be empowered to approve an application or reverse one or more of the modifications made by the Council only with the agreement of at least two of the three members. Implementation: The proposed Charter amendments establishing the Affordable Housing Appeals Board would take effect immediately. 11 Question 5 Proposed Charter Amendment: Create a Digital City Map to Modernize City Operations Consolidate borough map office and address assignment functions, and create one digital City Map at Department of City Planning. Today, the City Map consists of paper maps across five offices. “Yes” creates a consolidated, digital City Map. “No” leaves in place five separate map and address assignment functions, administered by Borough President Offices. 12 Ballot Question 5 Proposed Charter Amendment: Create a Digital City Map to Modernize City Operations Abstract This proposal would require the City to consolidate and digitize the City Map. Currently, the Charter assigns administration of the City Map, which consists of many separate paper maps, to five separate Borough President Topographical Bureaus. This proposal would replace the existing, decentralized paper City Map with a single City Map administered by the Department of City Planning (DCP) and would also provide for the digitization of the City Map. Under the proposal, DCPwould also assume responsibility for address assignment. What is the City Map: The City Map establishes the legally defined locations of street lines, widths, names, and legal grades, as well as the locations of mapped parkland and public places. Today, the City Map consists of five different sets, one for each borough, totaling over 8,000 individual paper maps. Certain housing, infrastructure, and other projects require confirmation of public jurisdiction as represented on the City Map before they can move forward, a process that can take months or years when it relies on paper maps. How it works: The proposal would centralize administration of the City Map at DCPand mandate a single City Map that covers the entire City, rather than paper maps limited to each borough. The proposal would also require the City Map to be digitized. It would also centralize administration of address assignment with the Department of City Planning, instead of leaving address assignment to the five Borough President Topographical Bureaus. Implementation: The transfer of address assignment from the Borough President Topographical Bureaus to the Department of City Planning would take effect on January 1, 2027. The City Map would be consolidated into one single document by January 1, 2028, or a later feasible date to be determined by the City Planning Commission. The City Map would be digitized by January 1, 2029, or a later feasible date to be determined by the Department of City Planning. 13 Question 6 Proposed Charter Amendment: Move Local Elections to Presidential Election Years to Increase Voter Participation Move the City’s primary and general election dates so that City elections are held in the same year as Federal Presidential elections, when permitted by state law. “Yes” moves City elections to the same year as Federal Presidential elections, when permitted by state law. “No” leaves laws unchanged. 14 Ballot Question 6 Proposed Charter Amendment: Move Local Elections to Presidential Election Years to Increase Voter Participation Abstract This proposal would make changes to the timing of elections held for the offices of Mayor, Public Advocate, Comptroller, Borough President, and City Council Members to move the City’s primary and general election dates to even-numbered years, upon a required change to State law. How it works: Currently, elections for City office are held in odd-numbered years. This proposal would provide for even-year elections that coincide with the federal presidential elections. A Charter amendment is required to move the election calendar to even years and to provide for a one-time transition in which elected officials would serve a term of three years (as opposed to the usual four years). A change to the State Constitution, which requires that all city officers be elected in odd-numbered years, is also necessary before New York City may shift its local elections to even years. If the necessary changes to state law occur, elections for City office would occur in the same year as the federal presidential elections. One-time transition from odd-year to even-year elections: A shift to even-year elections on the presidential cycle would, when it goes into effect, require a one time transition in which elected officials would serve a term of three years, instead of the typical four years. The timing of this one-time transition cycle would depend on whether and when a State law is enacted to permit New York City to move its elections to even years. Councilmember two-year terms: Currently, the Charter provides for a shortened two-year term every 20 years for City Councilmembers in order to coordinate City Council terms after a redistricting, which is required after every decennial census. As a result, every two decades, the City holds elections for City Council but not for citywide or boroughwide elected officials. Under the proposed system, these periodic two-year terms would be eliminated, so that Councilmembers serve only four-year terms. As a consequence, there will sometimes be a longer delay in the use of new district lines following a redistricting than there is today, but this change ensures that elections for City Council occur during cycles with the higher 15 turnout that is expected to be associated with elections held in even-numbered years. If a State law authorizing the City to hold elections for City office in even numbered years takes effect during a two-year term, that term would be either shortened to one year or extended to three years, depending on the precise timing of the State law. This one-time transition would enable the switch to holding elections for City office in even-numbered years. Implementation: This proposal would take effect upon the effective date of a State law authorizing the City to hold elections for City office to occur in even numbered years. 16

 

DETAILS REFERRAL
https://vote.nyc/sites/default/files/pdf/Ballot_Proposals/GE2025/Ballot_Proposals_2025_English_r1a_WEB.pdf

 

REFERRAL
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/politics/nyc-ballot-questions-what-are-they/6413813/

 

 

93% of voting

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/election-day-2025?msockid=2423737518666ffa14b265e519726e69

 

forum post
https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12023-nyc-mayral-thoughts-a-conclusion/

 

 

COMMENTS

 

URL

 

MY THOUGHTS TO IT 

 

On 11/5/2025 at 11:02 AM, ProfD said:

It is a done deal.  NYC Mayor-Elect Zohran Mamdani won in a landslide. 

It wasn't a landslide, MAmdani won 50% of voting after 93% of votes came in . And I can say, many didn't vote. NYC has over ten million people , many did not vote. MANY ok, I even asked various immigrant peoples. They didn't vote. Maybe they couldn't. OK, these were strangers, but I asked, many didn't vote. 

 

 

On 11/5/2025 at 11:02 AM, ProfD said:

If successful, rent freeze, free buses, affordable healthcare, more teachers and other things will benefit the citizens of NYC.

Successful... the word I rather use is possible. It is interesting ProfD chose that. I Ask all of you who may read this, focus on results in your prose concerning government. Every single governmental officials fails and succeeds all the time, it isn't a sum .

But functionality can be clearly defined. 

First, the mayor of New York City doesn't have these powers. I don't know who said the mayor of New York City is a king... who started this narrative about doing all this stuff as mayor? So many offline and online have said what profd said and I don't get where any of these people got that from , where that narrative began, does anyone know? I even argue, like Obama that Mamdani has an excellent media team that really does all of that very well. 

De blasio rent freezed for eight years , didn't lower the rent. I find it funny that NYC in recent memory had a mayor who rent freezed and yet, it doesn't seem to be known by anyone at least in admittance, maybe it is a secret I am unaware of in some fashion.

The Mayor doesn't control the buses, or the MTA, the governor does and if the governor gives free buses to NYC, the governor will have to give free transport to all of New York State, while of course paying all the transit workers, and this is with no guarantee of federal money. Hochul is not crazy. 

The Mayor of NYC is not in control of healthcare plans... where does all this come from? Maybe I am stupid but I don't comprehend why so many in NYC or outside of it, keep saying similar to profd,  BLoomberg was/is a billionaire , had three terms and had no control whatsoever over these things, how is mamdani going to ? what? 

And where is the money to hire the teachers going to come from? 

Mamdani's public legislative record in the ny assembly which I cited above, in which nothing he did came from some hidden corner . Mamdani likes legislations that have the government spending money, but the problem is, the usa government has to be willing to print that money. 

I don't see how Mamdani will accomplish any of these things with the power of a mayor, unless he has some mind control job and he is going to get the governor of new york state + president of the usa to bend to his will... cause he needs the president of the usa + governor of NYC to make all those things happen. 

On 11/5/2025 at 11:02 AM, ProfD said:

The white media is losing their minds over Mayor-Elect Mamdani because he seemingly came out of left field.  Showed up like a unicorn.  He doesn't  fit the red or blue narrative. 

It is interestin,  NYC media hasn't been shocked but NYC media went through AOC. Maybe outside NYC, white owned media is incapable of handling this moment,  but mamdani is a muslim, and for many christians in the usa, well, the reality of a muslim being mayor of a big city is... crusaderish.  NYC media has had one question which I have had, how is he going to accomplish? The laws exists, how is he going to change the laws? I find it interesting that a non black is not questioned on how by even black people... well ok. 

Mamdani's campaign success had the same roots of Obama/OCasio cortez/Olhan ground game. AOC had the exact same scenario, opponent was a white old donkey who didn't comprehend the demographic changes. Obama likewise, in that his old white was a white woman. 

I ask all who may read this, Does scrhumpt fit the red or blue narrative, if red was supposed to mean war hawk maintaining the international order, I don't think schrumpft fits that as he is trying to dismantle the old international order? Does obama fit the red or blue narrative, Obama made ICE, is that showing an opennes to the other in blue? Did Bush jr fit the red or blue narrative, bush jr made the african american museum not obama, does that fit a white power narrative in red? Did Mr Clinton fit the red or blue narrative , he is the one who made the unevenly applied welfare to work program so no blue equality as well as the one who governed the dot com bubble into its inevitable disaster, not really blue techie . I have mentioned how the dichotomy argument in the USA is one of those historic public lies in the usa. Ever since the usa had two parties from the early 1800s, they each created the dichotomy advertisement campaign. whether their names are whigs or federalist or whatever, they have maintained that ad campaign a long time, but it was a never a true representation of anything. were the first people in this country ever red or blue? of course not. were Black DOSers ever red or blue? of course not. 

Both first peoples+Black DOSers historically have always been two seperate entities that didn't have the militaristic power to state themselves properly. But not having the ability to advertise your trueself doesn't mean your not your true self. Again, Frederick Douglass/WEBDUbois/MLK j were arguably the most engages, integrationary ,black leaders and all were booed by a majority of black people during their life time, which proves black people were never donkey or elephant, red or blue and to be blunt, no one in the usa was or is. 

But I repeat what MAmdani is, a fiscal capitalist. People keep trying to make him some unique agent, he isn't. 

All legislators are wisely judged by only one thing, their legislation, not speeches, not their racial makeup[phenotype/money/geographic ancestry/religion/party of governance affiliation] 

Mamdani is a fiscal capitalist whose primary desire is to use the military might of the usa to make wealth to support various municipal projects in the usa. 

I even remember someone saying in big media years back , a so called leftist democrat, that the usa can just print money to finance all it needs. Which functionally means, use the usa military power to print as much money and provide as much money as needed to make the economy of the usa run. And that is mamdani. fiscal capitalism through government. 

I Don't think it is democratic socialism at all or communism or religious fervor or any of the many claims people give to mamdani. 

But I think if he is smart he take after the two candidates he is very much alike SCrumpft + Obama.

He said he wanted to make history, so did obama +schrumpft. But if he is smart, go schrumpfts route, focus on a voting base and what the mayor can do. 

The mayor's greatest power is hiring or firing people in NYC governmnet and manipulating the bureaucracy of NYC. he doesn't control budgets of any sort , every mayor for decades eveyr year goes to albany and begs for money. That is not money any mayor of NYC controls. NYC mayor doesn't control the schools, NY State does. the mayor doesn't control healthcare, NYState and the federal government does. 

I said years ago obama should had polished the federal governments bureaucracy , many black people online called me crazy or other negatives, not mean spirited but in firm opposition but in cheap hindsight i was right. 

Because schrumpft is president, a position the congress of the usa has empowered over a century, he can do many things, but a mayor of nyc can't and hochul will be compelled to restrain nyc by the other cities or the counties of new york state and she as governor has the power to do it. 

referral

https://www.dayonefor.nyc/scope-of-mayoral-power/

 

 

On 11/5/2025 at 11:02 AM, ProfD said:

Democrats were never all-in on Mayor-Elect Mamdani.  Now, they will be studying his recipe to pick and choose the ingredients and type of candidates needed to win future elections in certain areas.

well here is the problem,NYC is unqiue. MAmdani has in NYC the only populace of a major city in the usa with such a mix of peoples.  all white towns or all black ones or native american reservations can't be approached like nyc. STacy Abrams arguably proved what mamdani did now already failed in some places in the usa... if any remembers her legendary ground game, better than mamdani's... but nyc is so different than the state of georgia. 

also the lack of voting in NYC, i repeat, media keeps saying more people voted now than in sixteen years but here is the problem nyc is over ten million people easy. ten percent of ten million is one million so ten percent of nyc's populace voting , and the bronx still had a very low turnout which media aren't reporting. I say in sport all the time, don't overestimate failure or underestimate success. What that means is, all to often , especially in government or fiscal activity, black people have a way of blowing up failures into christian raptures, while making successes seem like quiet balances of nature. 

The usa has a populace of over three hundred million, in my lifetime no election in any position has ever garnered fifty percent or better, which means no election has ever been as potent a win or failure as suggested and their lies the true problem. 

NYC has alot of problems, serious problems, and mamdani/cuoma/sliwa/AOC/Schrumpft/Olhan/Obama/Clintons/the surpreme court, none of these people have the answer, they don't even have the ability to work together to find an answer together... so... I find it telling how many people love to suggest the era change and not assess the modernity evenly. 

 

comment referral

https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12023-nyc-mayral-thoughts-a-conclusion/#findComment-77385

 

Posted Wednesday at 05:54 PM

 a drop of seriousness

 

@ProfD 

The short answer, Mamdani will not be de blasio 2.0 in any way

 

...

The long answer....

What does Lindsey to Mamdani have in common? 

The problems of NYC are beyond the office of mayor to solve. 

Lindsey->Koch->Dinkins->Guiliani->Bloomberg->De Blasio->Adams->Mamdani all couldn't actually repair the problems of the city. They each put bandages on select problems, but each bandaid always erased eventually onto a worse wound. 

Lindsey allowed the gypsy cabs, made the knapp report to clean up law enforcement. But the governor, rockefeller,  made rjikers. The governor didn't use his power to keep business in Nyc or new york state. he allowed the federal funds to support the white flight, lindsey had no way to stop that.

Koch didn't make the roaring 80s of NYC or the urban plight of the 80s, Reagan did. Reagan defunded schools, public works projects which negatively influenced all the non white regions in nyc during koch's time, while reagan also gave money to big business which led to the big building boom downtown manhattan during koch's time and the expansion of banking operations. koch simply set up ny city law enforcement to have free reign on abusing the poor who were inevitable, starting NYC law enforcement's infatuation with being protected.

Dinkins was denied by the banks the prior mayors had agreements with through the city to do business. Dinkins also had the unenviable task of coming after three terms of koch so dinkins in everything he was trying to do was deemed radical because the city had twelve years of one way. 

Guiliani expanded the reagan idea by selling the buildings nyc owned to private or forcing them into becoming coops. But guiliani wasn't why the rents were getting higher and food more expensive or the labor market in the city was getting too narrow. The real estate industry had been allowed through the federal government to prop itself up and maintain its value in very artificial ways. And he wasnt to blame for the dot com bubble which influenced real estate. 

Bloomberg gave real estate everything they wanted, more and more buildings, he opened up brooklyn to the modern highrise, he wanted to do the same to bronx or queens but all the implosions of various industries, from banks to automotive to whatever. Bloomberg emphasized the charter school movement, attacking harlem's schools like guiliani attack harlem's residentials. 

De Blasio rent froze and supported public schools but he came after twenty years of guiliani+bloomberg who supported the real estate industries agendas and law enforcement. and then the building collapse happened, another age of corporate consolidation started so downtown was unhappy, but the city didn't have any industry outside real estate/banking, which none of the prior mayors worked for or were allowed to do in circa thirty two years. 

Adams comes in and says he will make nyc safer,but that is by spending on law enforcement but all his labor numbers are hogwash. the city has for ten years, over one hundred thousand homeless children in public school. Adams didn't find their parents jobs so the job growth he mentioned is not functional, just statistical games. 

MAmdani wants affordability, but while the mayor can lower the rent he can't force the cost of utilities to go lower, he can't force the various coops or private buildings that have been ushered in before him to lower their rent. He doesn't control the management of international trade which nyc relies on as nyc will never have the ability to feed itself, a population of way over ten million people in a city geographic space far smaller than los angeles. Consider los angeles has about a fourth of nyc's populace but at least double nyc's landmass. 

Mamdani simply joins the ranks of mayors who are bandaid men. Whatever they choose to focus on will look good for a while but the external forces will render mute. 

The casinos is a state issue. Marijuana is a state issue. The real estate industry in the city because guiliani+bloomberg privatized so much is beyond any mayor's control.  This is why the fast track is being considered. But , my parents say it best, and they have lived through multiple housing booms. Housing booms never lower the rent. And the reason why is the business of real estate isn't about places to live but investments. So many people in NYC own properties as investment,s they don't live there, they don't want to build anything there, they simply want tenants to leech through rents or sell for some financial goal per some personal plan. Add the underreported and ballooning nyc populace. Those three factors mean new buildings can never lower the rent. I even expect legal action against the fast track program. What media may not have told those outside nyc is that, many regions of nyc, blockade new buildings while pushing new buildings into the poorest regions. The wealthy black community in Queens has never had a alcoholics anonymous where they are. so, i can see legal action. Schrumpft will support it to breed chaos and then.... Food is totally out of the control of mayor. When the sars cov 2 happened, NYC was at the mercy of the international trade of goods. ... maybe mamdani can try to tax foods that have ny state alternatives. New york state does have some food producers but do they make enough... bloomberg and de blasio tried to get the wind farm but that is  behind schedule/in limbo before schrumpft and with schrumpt... maybe dead, I don't know, so energy is going to rise, nuclear power is no unless someone comes up with fusion or fission but figures out how to make the pipes for the molten salt reactors of fission. the cost of living  is going to rise. Maybe mamdani can try tax incentives, but as a legislator in the state assembly he didn't seem a big tax incentive man. he seemed to be a tax eliminator man. And MAmdani has no control over the shutdown battle, which is a battle of blinks. the donkeys + elephants have plans on the congress floor, neither will sign the one the other made, so the shutdown is until one decides to sign the one the other made. MAmdani has no control over that, but the ebt and snap is huge for nyc's elderly and fiscally poor populace. the NYPD are always up for the policing bit but, mamdani has never been in a situation where he has to govern the nypd while also utilize them, if he makes a mistake, he will deemed a traitor by many of his voters. I don't know where jobs will come from, the schools in nyc are tyring to have job initiatives cause they see, that graudates aren't getting job to such a quantity that it will influence how people view going to college. 

The city have problems. Mamdani will never be De Blasio 2-0 but he is Mamdani 1.0 already. 

If MAmdani is lucky before next year the federal government finds some sort of balance. If he is unlucky, Mamdani will be entering the job of mayor with a city boiled over or about to boil over. ... Adams I must say has a huge role. The modulation between adams and mamdani is also huge. Usually the new mayor comes in like a storm, but that I don't think is a wise way for mamdani to come in. 

We shall see. 

My final issue are his voters. If MAmdani starts bad, this will be a very long four years for him. He can't afford to start bad. The media alone will cricify him but it will test his supporters. Maybe they will remain faithful, hopeful, but... 

 

comment referral

https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12023-nyc-mayral-thoughts-a-conclusion/#findComment-77391

 

 

Posted just now

@ProfD @Pioneer1 @Mel Hopkins 

Well here is an idea being positive. 

My Preface

I made a suggestion when Obama became president, that he should had spent his time improving the efficiency of the federal bureaucracy, as president he could do that with no input from anyone else. PResidents can't control the economy of the world, they can't protect peoples in states, they can't make laws that are everlasting. 

Presidents legal parameters allow them to manipulate the executive branch bureaucracy, and mold the war machine with no input from any other. 

That didn't happen. Obama meddled in finance and healthcare and made the bureaucracy worse and made the war machine worse.

My Idea for Mamdani

The mayor of NYC can't control or manipulate the price of food[private industry]. the cost of utilities[private industry]. the global real estate industries interwoven system[private industry]. the employers reaction to modern computing power[that is private industry], get money to finance the city[that is the governor]. The reality is the modern global fiscal capitalistic structure NYC was placed firmly in through decades of actions that can not be undone in four years or eight years or twelve years. The mayor of NYC can improve the bureaucracy of NYC, for example manipulating the NYPD into another organization. 

But the mayor can also pass laws, unlike the president who has been given legal powers by the congress. the mayor has the greater power in NYC, and so to the affordability push, I say make an affordability scale law.

What do I mean? 

Butter cost eight dollars for four sticks. Which means two sticks cost four dollars. One stick costs two dollars. A half of a stick cost one dollar. 

But most stores only sell packs of four or two. So, the affordability law is needed to get customers the ability to scale down what is sold to them. 

For example, for butter, why can't customers have a half a stick of butter available for one dollar? Literally have the stores, the delis + supermarkets , be within a legal right to sell goods when applicable in a more affordable way. 

The mayor can't lower the cost of butter, but in NYC with so many relying on EBT/Snap/Food pantries including federal workers who haven't been paid, forcing businesses to sell products more affordably i think is something he could had said he was going to do during the campaign. 

Maybe I am too serious or to honest, but I have never comprehended why anyone in government in a post or applying for a post provides pie in the sky or hopes or possibilities. All government post in human history have rules, even kings or queens. The rules dictate what you can do. So, just tell people with what you will be able to do in a position what you will do. 

Well that is it, my one idea to push. BAsed on Obama+AOC + Ohlan+.. Adams plus many others, the odds are mamdani's agenda will be nothing as I suggest. But, I gave a functional idea. 

 

Comment referral

https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12023-nyc-mayral-thoughts-a-conclusion/#findComment-77442

 

Posted just now

@ProfD

  10 minutes ago, ProfD said:

Businesses can either scale products to be more affordable and/or EBT/SNAP benefits 

can be increased to more adequately cover costs of products and goods.

remember, ebt/snap are all federal issues, the mayor of nyc has no power over those benefits, but getting businesses in nyc to scale products he can do, at least get a law made and I think enough support exists in nyc for that to happen. The detractors will be the grocers who will tax hit or an overhead cost increase with this action. But, the growing lines of people i see on the food pantry I don't think will mind. In this way those people who may have pennies here or there can go to the stores and buy something. 

 

  10 minutes ago, ProfD said:

There is no good reason for the wealthiest country on the planet for any of its citizens to be poor, hungry or homeless. Especially when it comes to women, children and senior citizens. 

It's funny profd, I have heard black people offline say that my entire life. and I have never once believed it to be true. the usa was built on the european colonies which themselves were built on the death of the first peoples. That is the truth, I don't know about good or bad reasons but I know true reasons. and they are what they are. the heritage of the usa is genocide is enslavement, we all know this , black people should know and yet... is it hope? is that what I miss? Is it communicating hope? is that the basis of that opinion which so many black people utter all the time. 

 

Comment referral

https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12023-nyc-mayral-thoughts-a-conclusion/#findComment-77444