And who would’ve thought that an ex-cop wouldn’t be for police transparency?
Everyone knew it…
But there’s a shit ton of rich people in NYC. So it’s easy for them to “donate” in both primaries and ensure that no matter what happens in the general, it’ll be a choice between two assholes.
Fwiw the mayoral election that resulted in Eric Adams was ranked choice.
Yes, but he was already the Brooklyn Borough President. He had a built in base of support that was larger than others’. This is basically Brooklyn’s fault.
He didn’t even live there, he lived in NJ. Reporters went to his “home” in BK and asked “where are all your clothes?” and “if you’re vegan, why is there meat in the fridge?” It was clearly his son’s place.
But it was more than that. He was also running as the only Democratic candidate to not “defund the police”.
His veto is following what he ran on.
In NYC, “defund the police” means “don’t give them a handy with the $100K in overtime for playing Candy Crush”.
The problem is not all voters hear that.
Giant Douche and Turd Sandwich
“Mayor Eric Adams said he was vetoing a police accountability bill passed by the City Council because it would “handcuff the police.””
Yeah, that’s the idea.
The “handcuffs” are just documenting interactions with the public. Something that could be done with body cameras and AI. Like this:
Interaction between Officer Smith and Citizen “A”
Summary: Citizen “A” did not want to speak with Officer Smith.
I, too, do not want to speak with Officer Smith.
It’s a good thing Mayor Adams is here to save us, the proles, from the risk of knowing how little law is involved in law enforcement.
Yes, it’s a real shame that “In spite of the mayor’s late push, the City Council is “prepared to override” both the mayor’s vetoes, according to Adrienne Adams, the Council speaker. It would be the second and third time that the Council has overridden the mayor, following a decision in July to reject his veto of a housing voucher program.”
Regarding the Housing Voucher Program: “I want to be clear: These bills are about helping the lowest-income New Yorkers facing homelessness and housing insecurity,” said the Council speaker, Adrienne Adams, calling the bills the most “significant policy reforms to address homelessness” in years.
“The fight centers on a set of bills that would make more New Yorkers who are either homeless or at risk of eviction eligible for a housing voucher program. Vouchers are already one of the city’s most significant housing initiatives.”
Why in earth does this man hate his fellow humans so much?
Why in earth does this man hate his fellow humans so much?
ACAB?
deleted by creator
He’s a cop
Yes, he’s trying to “protect” landlords and other cops with these vetoes.
Just drink your Victory Gin, you’ve got an early shift at the information ministry.
Guess what Adams used to be before he was a mayor?
A minor?
Once a cop, always a cop. Anyway, good luck to him on his federal investigation. No doubt he’ll find some way to skate on that too.
This guy really saw how much people hate Giuliani and said, "hold my beer’
Giuliani was a popular mayor. I think Adams would love to see a large drop in crime during his term and win reelection like Giuliani did.
Giuliani got “lucky” that he was in office on 9/11. He wasn’t a particularly good mayor and plenty of people knew it but he managed to turn that into a lot of goodwill. Now that he’s shown his ass repeatedly, people are losing the rose-tinted glasses big time. Adams just decided he wasn’t gonna wait 15 years to make people hate him. He’s an overachiever.
Giuliani was re-elected before 9/11 because he was “tough on crime” and crime declined dramatically while he was in office. By the time 9/11 happened, he was not eligible to run for mayor again due to term limits.
Yeah, I remember him instituting blatantly unconstitutional policies like “stop and frisk”. I’m still not sure how he got away with it or how people didn’t realize he was a fascist.
He got lucky in that a lot of the reasons for the nationwide decrease in crime happened during his administration.
You also had enough people in NYC happy that the city was becoming more orderly.
He was only popular with people outside of NY who had no idea who he was before 9/11…
He was elected mayor twice, both times before 9/11 (which happened only a few months before the end of his second term). After 9/11 he was never elected to any office again, despite his efforts.
Did you just now figure out the two party system usually results in a general with two options who are unpopular?
Congrats? I guess someone figures it out every day…
As a matter of fact, he was popular.
Right before his re-election,
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s approval rating has edged up to an all-time 68 - 28 percent high, matching a record of 70 percent of New Yorkers who are “very satisfied” or “somewhat satisfied” with life in the city, according to a Quinnipiac College Poll released today.
with life in the city
Rudy wasn’t popular with New Yorkers…
New York was popular with New Yorkers
Acab
Please enjoy the recent Chapo Trap House episode on Eric Adams: https://soundgasm.net/u/ClassWarAndPuppies2/799-Swag-on-Loan-From-God-feat-Chris-Robbins-Katie-Way-11824
Adams reminds me a lot of the late-night party mayors of the ‘80s and ‘90s, in DC and Richmond VA. Those guys both went to jail, IIRC.
At every turn it’s politicians blatantly and consistently implementing and going with the most fascist measures as possible. I don’t know how the country is still standing.
This man is a bad mayor and bad person. Good day.
Good day? Who talks like that?
I said GOOD DAY SIR!
Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit
Asshole.
Adams was (at least IMO) the most conservative of the serious candidates for mayor; people voted for him because he was an ex-cop with the expectation that he would be tough on crime. People also blame him (and executive-branch politicians in general) for things that aren’t actually within his control, so I can see why he would want to draw attention to the city council like this, but it’s still grandstanding rather than effective policy.
“tough on crime” is such a nonsense, afactual, high truthiness position. Anyone who unironically talks about being tough on crime should be barred from involvement in politics. It’s a strong indicator they’re going to ignore facts and data and just do what “feels” good to them.
For reals. Why would anybody just waltz in and choose to let extra murderers and rapists go when they could instead take them off the streets? It’s just a proclamation for candidates and their drones who have no new ideas or strong positions geared at advancing society.
