Seems to me like he's doing a great job managing a lot of hats. Glad to see him succeeding.
this post was submitted on 12 May 2026
317 points (97.9% liked)
politics
29742 readers
2431 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
A controversial part of that is reducing pension interests.
when I'm Governor, the stealing stops. I'll cut your taxes, slash your utility bills in half, and put your hard-earned money back where it belongs -- in your pocket, not Mamdani's."
Exactly what Trump said. Exactly what every MAGA/Republican has said for 50 years. And yet, here we are, and none of those promises have EVER happened for anyone but the very wealthy.
Well. When they speak, they don't speak to the people. But to the very wealthy. Many people do not get that detail.
Meh, tax em anyways.
I'm not in favor of taxing the rich give them free baskets instead
It doesn't solve the underlying problem of wealth disparity. You can keep chopping day after day, year after year, but the inevitable solution is going to be: take the wealth and redistribute it. AKA Taxes.
They do seem to be proposing an aggressive Estate Tax campaign.
If you give them all free baskets for their heads long enough you will be fine taxes require a government those don't seem to be doing good at this
-
Not having a government leads directly into a violent government
-
Many countries do this task quite well.
Plenty of places have little or no government and no billionaires even with States actively trying to fight the idea. Government is only one way of organizing and not a very good or egalitarian one
If you "organize" a nation full of people to decide on the "rules", then that is "government" writing the "laws".
So the IEEE and web consortium and Wikipedia foundation are governments.
If Wikipedia were the sole organization operating within a territory and they decided what people were allowed to do in that territory, then yes they'd abso-fucking-lutely be the government.
So what if there isn't that and everyone kind of gets a say
You know that's not even how government worked for most of history right that's super recent and like newer than steam engine real politics is complicated
That's not even how modern us government works
Edit: so my ex gf was Canadian. She lived in Los Angeles in winter. A sanctuary city. Matters because she was an immigrant and didn't do any paperwork about it. Feds would arrest her city cops were forbidden from arresting her for that and we both smoked a ton of weed which feds say is illegal but the state/province if California said is legal and fine and needs to be taxed but the feds would fuck your shit up for if you were known for it.
There is not one authority deciding what is and isn't okay even here and now and it used to be way more fractious complicated. Imagine if I was catholic or wahabbist.
“If 1% of your population is paying 45% of your tax revenue…” then they should be turned into paste. What world does this ~~guy~~ billionaire live in?
He's been coddled by cronies and yes-men for so long that he's forgotten how to speak without expecting ot hear applause.
Ah yes, everybody knows that New York has the ability to hand out capital punishment based on what you out on your tax return. Stupid liberal Mamdani, how did he not do this! /s
One where the president says he should be "cherished"
Those are big numbers to balance. Wishing the best they come true in 6-12 months.
Why didn't he cut any of NYPD's draining (and harmful) budget. Wtf?
Police have a lot of leverage power.
Almost all police are part of some form of union, and they have the ability to say "fuck you, we're not going to respond to emergency calls if you don't give us what we want"
...
aaaaaaand they'll use that tactic to force cities not to implement alternatives to police, like qualified, unarmed, de-escalation trained mental health experts that handle certain situations better than cops, so police retain a total monopoly over state violence and decisions about if someone should be arrested or not... which then lets them keep their bargaining power to do it all over again.
Wasn't Mamdani saying the whole campaign that he promised to keep the NYPD budget in return for the NYPD refocusing on violent crime and the NYPD leadership staying? If he pissed off the entire NYPD things would probably be more expensive.
It doesn't matter what he said, he's kind of at the mercy of (shitty) police unions.
Just look at how they responded when de Blasio dared to level even the most tepid criticism.
Cops in my city just stopped working after 2020.
Yeah, increasingly I've noticed cops just not giving a fuck about the law and doing whatever they want
Cut their funding in half and see how much power they have.
They are superfluous. That's kinda the point. We don't need them to respond to calls. Give half their funding to other people without guns to respond to calls.
We don't need them to respond to calls
Exactly, the last time the NYPD went on strike, crime went down lmao
Crime didn't go up last strike
In contrast to the Boston Police Strike of 1919, and the Montreal strike of 1969, there was no surge of crime or unrest.
I'm taking about 2015.
Katie Hochul gave him billions?
In exchange for taxing billionaire's second homes in the city, it seems
Could you not find a source for this other than CBS News?