5 ms·

> And lots of his dumb comments were from like 2 years ago, not 12 - he was not "young" when he said them. If you're talking about the "globalize the intifada"

> And lots of his dumb comments were from like 2 years ago, not 12 - he was not "young" when he said them. If you're talking about the "globalize the intifada" comment, he actually never even said that, but a whole lot of people (you among them, it seems like?) have been brainwashed into thinking he did through political maneuvering. The root of that whole drummed up controversy was him refusing to blanket condemn the phrase when media people (never attributing it as something he himself had said) kept asking him to. And he was always very clear what his reasons for that were, which were extremely reasonable to anyone who isn't a kneejerk ultra zionist.

timr 1y ago
[flagged]
- idle_zealot 1y ago
  > About the only response to this stuff a reasonable person can muster is "he doesn't believe that now" He clearly still believes in police reform. In some places that includes reducing police budgets in favor of more effective public safety programs. That's what "defund the police" means. Not "abolish", reduce funding. In NYC he's running on maintaining police funding at current levels and adding additional nonviolent peacekeeping capacity. He may personally believe that ultimately funding can be redirected further, but that's not what he's running on. Criminal justice is majorly fucked in the US broadly. We incarcerate non-dangerous people with minor offenses way too long, and we let dangerous repeat offenders walk free. The answer isn't so simple as "lock more people up" or "let everyone go", we're in a trickier bind than a straightforward over incarceration or over lenient set of policies. Mamdani talks a lot about reducing penalties for minor nonviolent offenders, and for increasing rehabilitative capacity, but he does retreat to rehabilitation too readily (from a rhetorical efficacy perspective) when questioned about how to handle repeat offenders. I don't think he's actually changed his values at all, he's just polished his phrasing and set more achievable near-term goals.
  - timr 1y ago
    > Not "abolish", reduce funding. Yeah, I understand that's what people are saying to rationalize it. And like I said: we'll find out! But see my reply to the sibling comment, where I link directly to his words: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45820126 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45820126 He's well-documented, saying many times, in many different variations, in many different places, that he wants to eliminate prisons, "dismantle" the police, and so on. One or two comments you might be able to brush aside, but this is a consistent pattern.
    - whoooboyy 1y ago
      That's what people are saying when they say defund. Reduce funding for. Consistently this is what anyone who says defund the police has always meant. You gotta take off the tin foil hat, my guy. "We'll find out" haha, you think he's going to shut down the nypd? They have an operating budget of what, $6 billion dollars annually? He's not going to shut them down, you can't just stop a $6b organization. You can, however, defund it. Maybe they could do just fine with $5 billion. If the city has an extra billion to spend on building housing or improving transit or providing health care or services to the homeless... a billion dollars a year buys a lot of things.
      - johnnyanmac 1y ago
        These kinds of folk will panic over "defund the police" as if it's shutting down an entire office. Meanwhile this administration proceeds to effectively shut down the DoED in all but name and we get a shrug back. It becomes very hard to assume good faith in such situations.
        pirates 1y ago
        There is no reason to assume good faith anymore. They revel in bad faith arguments
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
- ThrowMeAway1618 1y ago
  >He said he wanted to close down Rikers Island. Yes. He did. Because the law[0] (the passage of which he was not involved) says Riker's Island needs to be closed by 2027 -- something Eric "how much will you pay to play?" Adams slow-walked on purpose. The rest of your diatribe is a bunch of bullshit that doesn't pass the sniff test. [0] https://archive.ph/eOJdK https://archive.ph/eOJdK
  - timr 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - ThrowMeAway1618 1y ago
      >and also think that closing Rikers is an incredibly stupid idea! That's as may be. And you are absolutely entitled to your opinion. But you called Mamdani out for promising to enforce the law. Are you not a fan of the rule of law?
      - timr 1y ago
        [flagged]
        ziml77 1y ago
        "Nope"? What is not factual about that statement?
        timr 1y ago
        It’s not what I said? Not even remotely.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- ZeroGravitas 1y ago
  > "I think that frankly, I mean, what purpose do they serve, right?” Mamdani said when asked by a co-host of “The Far Left Show” in August 2020 if prisons were obsolete. > “I think we have to ask ourselves that … I think a lot of people who defend the carceral state, that defend the idea of it and the way it makes them feel, they’re not defending the reality of it and the practices that are part and parcel of it,” he continued. > “Because if you actually break it down … how many people come out the prison system better than they went into the prison system?” From the New York Post so presumably this is the worst they could find on the topic.
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  >About the only response to this stuff a reasonable person can muster is "he doesn't believe that now". My response is "looks good to me. Accepted". if police aren't protecting the people they shouldn't be funded by taxpayers. All for police reform. And yes, if we aren't jailing everyone for being homeless or smoking weed, we'd need less prisons. If prisons were about reform, we'd nedd less prisons. These all make sense. But I guess if detractors just want to take soundbites, remove all subtlety, and blast it out to twitter's 280 character limit, then their plan worked. It's just a same these same people would try to downplay 90% of the stuff Trump said in 2024 that he is doing in 2025 to the letter.
aeternum 1y ago
Here's him talking about it for those that want to form their own opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggV2SeiGrVw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggV2SeiGrVw
timr 1y ago
It's so depressing that the entire Mamdani debate has become mired in Israeli politics. You can completely ignore that issue, and still have plenty of questionable stuff to talk about. He has repeatedly talked about defunding the police. Literally, not figuratively, and not that long ago [1a-c]. He said he wanted to close down Rikers Island, right in the middle of the debates [2]. He said that prisons are unnecessary [3]. He said he wants to empty jails [4-6]. His comments on crime and policing, in general, are quite extreme. I could set literally every other topic to the side, and this would be a voting issue for me. These are his words. I'm not taking them out of context or reinterpreting them. About the only response to this stuff a reasonable person can muster is "he doesn't believe that now". Yeah, OK. I guess we'll find out... [1a] "NO to fake cuts - defund the police." https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1277414510131916801 https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1277414510131916801 [1b] more on his historical comments on defunding: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/31/politics/mamdani-defund-police-shooting https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/31/politics/mamdani-defund-p... [1c] "dismantle" the police (in this case, the Vice squad): https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1336087694636707841 https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1336087694636707841 [2] "Yes, we have to close Riker's island" https://www.facebook.com/reel/1380642053476909 https://www.facebook.com/reel/1380642053476909 [3] prisons unnecessary: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/out-of-touch-mamdanis-old-prison-remarks-resurface-law-enforcement-slams-nyc-hopeful/articleshow/122772663.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/out-of-touch-ma... [4] "the goal must be to abolish [prisons]" (plus multiple other variations on that theme) https://x.com/peterjhasson/status/1937682021276410317 https://x.com/peterjhasson/status/1937682021276410317 [5] "The entire carceral system is an unreformable public health hazard. Defund & dismantle." https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1328828240757215234 https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1328828240757215234 [6] "what purpose do [prisons] serve?" https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1945929553274196188 https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1945929553274196188
- skeaker 1y ago
  [1] does not mean no more police. The NYPD has $11 billion in funding and has offices all over the world for some reason when they should really just be city-sized for NY. They are overfunded, and he believes they should not be. [2-6] indicate that our current prison system is punitive and does nothing in the way of rehabilitation or reform. No, he will not close every prison. Yes, in an ideal world we would not need hundreds of prisons full to the brim because we would actually rehabilitate and release people. This is hardly a fringe opinion and it is in fact a very common criticism of our prison system. Interpreting these statements as "he is just going to stop prisons and let all the violent criminals out in one go!!!" with no further though IS reinterpreting his words uncharitably because obviously that would be stupid.

timr 1y ago

[flagged]

idle_zealot 1y ago
> About the only response to this stuff a reasonable person can muster is "he doesn't believe that now" He clearly still believes in police reform. In some places that includes reducing police budgets in favor of more effective public safety programs. That's what "defund the police" means. Not "abolish", reduce funding. In NYC he's running on maintaining police funding at current levels and adding additional nonviolent peacekeeping capacity. He may personally believe that ultimately funding can be redirected further, but that's not what he's running on. Criminal justice is majorly fucked in the US broadly. We incarcerate non-dangerous people with minor offenses way too long, and we let dangerous repeat offenders walk free. The answer isn't so simple as "lock more people up" or "let everyone go", we're in a trickier bind than a straightforward over incarceration or over lenient set of policies. Mamdani talks a lot about reducing penalties for minor nonviolent offenders, and for increasing rehabilitative capacity, but he does retreat to rehabilitation too readily (from a rhetorical efficacy perspective) when questioned about how to handle repeat offenders. I don't think he's actually changed his values at all, he's just polished his phrasing and set more achievable near-term goals.
- timr 1y ago
  > Not "abolish", reduce funding. Yeah, I understand that's what people are saying to rationalize it. And like I said: we'll find out! But see my reply to the sibling comment, where I link directly to his words: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45820126 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45820126 He's well-documented, saying many times, in many different variations, in many different places, that he wants to eliminate prisons, "dismantle" the police, and so on. One or two comments you might be able to brush aside, but this is a consistent pattern.
  - whoooboyy 1y ago
    That's what people are saying when they say defund. Reduce funding for. Consistently this is what anyone who says defund the police has always meant. You gotta take off the tin foil hat, my guy. "We'll find out" haha, you think he's going to shut down the nypd? They have an operating budget of what, $6 billion dollars annually? He's not going to shut them down, you can't just stop a $6b organization. You can, however, defund it. Maybe they could do just fine with $5 billion. If the city has an extra billion to spend on building housing or improving transit or providing health care or services to the homeless... a billion dollars a year buys a lot of things.
    - johnnyanmac 1y ago
      These kinds of folk will panic over "defund the police" as if it's shutting down an entire office. Meanwhile this administration proceeds to effectively shut down the DoED in all but name and we get a shrug back. It becomes very hard to assume good faith in such situations.
      - pirates 1y ago
        There is no reason to assume good faith anymore. They revel in bad faith arguments
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
ThrowMeAway1618 1y ago
>He said he wanted to close down Rikers Island. Yes. He did. Because the law[0] (the passage of which he was not involved) says Riker's Island needs to be closed by 2027 -- something Eric "how much will you pay to play?" Adams slow-walked on purpose. The rest of your diatribe is a bunch of bullshit that doesn't pass the sniff test. [0] https://archive.ph/eOJdK https://archive.ph/eOJdK
- timr 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - ThrowMeAway1618 1y ago
    >and also think that closing Rikers is an incredibly stupid idea! That's as may be. And you are absolutely entitled to your opinion. But you called Mamdani out for promising to enforce the law. Are you not a fan of the rule of law?
    - timr 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - ziml77 1y ago
        "Nope"? What is not factual about that statement?
        timr 1y ago
        It’s not what I said? Not even remotely.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
ZeroGravitas 1y ago
> "I think that frankly, I mean, what purpose do they serve, right?” Mamdani said when asked by a co-host of “The Far Left Show” in August 2020 if prisons were obsolete. > “I think we have to ask ourselves that … I think a lot of people who defend the carceral state, that defend the idea of it and the way it makes them feel, they’re not defending the reality of it and the practices that are part and parcel of it,” he continued. > “Because if you actually break it down … how many people come out the prison system better than they went into the prison system?” From the New York Post so presumably this is the worst they could find on the topic.
johnnyanmac 1y ago
>About the only response to this stuff a reasonable person can muster is "he doesn't believe that now". My response is "looks good to me. Accepted". if police aren't protecting the people they shouldn't be funded by taxpayers. All for police reform. And yes, if we aren't jailing everyone for being homeless or smoking weed, we'd need less prisons. If prisons were about reform, we'd nedd less prisons. These all make sense. But I guess if detractors just want to take soundbites, remove all subtlety, and blast it out to twitter's 280 character limit, then their plan worked. It's just a same these same people would try to downplay 90% of the stuff Trump said in 2024 that he is doing in 2025 to the letter.

aeternum 1y ago

Here's him talking about it for those that want to form their own opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggV2SeiGrVw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggV2SeiGrVw

timr 1y ago

It's so depressing that the entire Mamdani debate has become mired in Israeli politics. You can completely ignore that issue, and still have plenty of questionable stuff to talk about. He has repeatedly talked about defunding the police. Literally, not figuratively, and not that long ago [1a-c]. He said he wanted to close down Rikers Island, right in the middle of the debates [2]. He said that prisons are unnecessary [3]. He said he wants to empty jails [4-6]. His comments on crime and policing, in general, are quite extreme. I could set literally every other topic to the side, and this would be a voting issue for me. These are his words. I'm not taking them out of context or reinterpreting them. About the only response to this stuff a reasonable person can muster is "he doesn't believe that now". Yeah, OK. I guess we'll find out... [1a] "NO to fake cuts - defund the police." https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1277414510131916801 https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1277414510131916801 [1b] more on his historical comments on defunding: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/31/politics/mamdani-defund-police-shooting https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/31/politics/mamdani-defund-p... [1c] "dismantle" the police (in this case, the Vice squad): https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1336087694636707841 https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1336087694636707841 [2] "Yes, we have to close Riker's island" https://www.facebook.com/reel/1380642053476909 https://www.facebook.com/reel/1380642053476909 [3] prisons unnecessary: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/out-of-touch-mamdanis-old-prison-remarks-resurface-law-enforcement-slams-nyc-hopeful/articleshow/122772663.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/out-of-touch-ma... [4] "the goal must be to abolish [prisons]" (plus multiple other variations on that theme) https://x.com/peterjhasson/status/1937682021276410317 https://x.com/peterjhasson/status/1937682021276410317 [5] "The entire carceral system is an unreformable public health hazard. Defund & dismantle." https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1328828240757215234 https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1328828240757215234 [6] "what purpose do [prisons] serve?" https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1945929553274196188 https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1945929553274196188

skeaker 1y ago
[1] does not mean no more police. The NYPD has $11 billion in funding and has offices all over the world for some reason when they should really just be city-sized for NY. They are overfunded, and he believes they should not be. [2-6] indicate that our current prison system is punitive and does nothing in the way of rehabilitation or reform. No, he will not close every prison. Yes, in an ideal world we would not need hundreds of prisons full to the brim because we would actually rehabilitate and release people. This is hardly a fringe opinion and it is in fact a very common criticism of our prison system. Interpreting these statements as "he is just going to stop prisons and let all the violent criminals out in one go!!!" with no further though IS reinterpreting his words uncharitably because obviously that would be stupid.