Eric Adams only barely squeaked through the primary, and even that was after literally four other forerunners either dropped out of the race or became embroiled in their own personal scandals.
As further evidence that the mayoral race was somewhat of a fluke, the same ballot also included many other citywide and local races, and more progressive candidates swept those races citywide, many of whom ran on platforms that explicitly promised to take on the NYPD.
Eric Adams didn't win because people wanted more NYPD power in city government; he won because he happened to be in the right place at the right time.
Compared to who - Garcia? Sure, but that's not surprising. The point is that the top four frontrunners were already eliminated, figuratively or literally, by the time the primary happened.
> and from speaking to many Bronxites, they absolutely wanted to see more cops on the streets and cops on the subways
It's easy to find anecdotes, but the facts show how people voted, and with the exception of the mayoral race, they consistently and overwhelming voted for candidates who promised to reign in the NYPD.
Nope, Adams's closest competitor in the Bronx was Wiley, but he still did about twice as well as she did in the first round. Adams was the first choice candidate for 45% of voters in the Bronx, the highest of any borough.
> It's easy to find anecdotes, but the facts show how people voted, and with the exception of the mayoral race, they consistently and overwhelming voted for candidates who promised to reign in the NYPD.
... which suggests to me that people are capable of voting for different candidates for different things, and that people have different expectations out of each. My district overwhelmingly sent AOC to Congress - and Adams to City Hall, beating out AOC endorsed Wiley 2:1.
> the facts show how people voted, and with the exception of the mayoral race, they consistently and overwhelming voted for candidates who promised to reign in the NYPD.
I don't see it quite the same way. People have different priorities and can pick and choose candidates accordingly. AOC's views on Congressional matters aligns with voters in my district, and they overwhelmingly supported her for Congress. Her views on the NYPD do not align with voters in my district, but they're not under her purview, so it doesn't matter. I can say that in my district when it comes to local matters, public safety is the number one priority, and that they look to the cops for support. At every public town hall meeting I've been to in my neighborhood, there have been demands for increased police presence, not less. I should also point out that a majority of the district is black/hispanic.
Under the current scheme, there is no incentive structure that "fixes" the NYPD; the NYPD is functioning as intended, and in broad conflict with the roles that constrain every other NYC civil servant (e.g., around living in the city).
The NYPD sees itself as an occupying force in a hostile city. What they've lost (or believe they've lost) is the respect of the natives; rather than questioning why that is, they've decided that the appropriate course of action is to extract all the value they can from the city while diminishing the natives' qualities of life to the greatest extent possible. Revanchism is the appropriate descriptor.
Again what loss do they to avenge exactly?
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-20/nypd-blow...
[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-nyc-police-overtime-...
> What they've lost (or believe they've lost) is the respect of the natives;
I don't know why you're performing such a hostile reading: it can be simultaneously true that tension for police and residents has been present for decades, and that the police have shed a degree of respect and baseline approval that they've historically held[1], regardless of whether that approval was ever actually justified.
Which is what has happened[2].
[1]: https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/205619.pdf
[2]: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/12/us/gallup-poll-police.htm...
The euphemism was more subtle, but is also a known one[2].
I'm sorry if you found either confusing; that wasn't my goal.
I recently looked into moving to NYC and was shocked to see prices similar to my middle of nowhere, significantly lower quality city. I could work in a pizzeria and live in NYC, this "it's too expensive" is really a suburban view of the sqft.
So why don't the civil servants making four times as much armed with lethal weapons live there?
Frankly, I'm amazed they consider it worth the commute to live outside the city.
Not everyone enjoys living in a shoe box or having a dozen roommates, for instance, and not everyone enjoys living in big cities either. Suburbs are amazing, despite what all the big city folks will tell you.
$82k a year in NYC is not amazing by any stretch. Could you realistically work in a pizzeria ($30k-$50k) and have a fulfilled life? Of course - but you will not be living well. There is a difference.
> 49% above what it considers the average annual income in the US.
You're comparing one of the highest cost of living areas with a national average. That's a very wrong comparison, and conclusion to make.
[1]: https://www.nyc.gov/site/nypd/careers/police-officers/po-ben...
(not that teachers shouldn't get paid more, they should)
I think that's addressed in Cop Land (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118887/). Excellent movie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Schoolcraft
The very people who were in charge of investigating police conduct reported him to his superiors. And then his own colleagues raided his house and forced him into involuntary confinement as an "emotionally disturbed person", handcuffs and all. The cops who delivered him to the psychiatric ward intentionally lied and misrepresented the whole thing to make sure that he remained confined and restrained.
Luckily, the guy had two recorders running during the raid, and the cops only found one, so there was ample evidence. I actually wonder if he'd still be in psych ward if not for that.