Current Events > Emerson NYC Primary poll has Mamdani beating Cuomo

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://emersoncollegepolling.com/new-york-city-mayoral-poll-june/

The final Emerson College Polling/PIX11/The Hill survey of the New York City Democratic mayoral primary finds former Governor Andrew Cuomo leading with 35% support, followed closely by Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani at 32%, and Comptroller Brad Lander at 13%. City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams follows with 8%, Scott Stringer with 3%, and 4% of voters remain undecided ahead of Tuesdays election. Since last months poll, Mamdani gained ten points on the initial ballot test, rising from 22% to 32%, while Cuomo gained one point, 34% to 35%.

The survey allowed voters to rank up to five candidates in order of preference. The ranked-choice voting simulation over eight rounds ends with Mamdani at 52% and Cuomo at 48%.

Holy shit

Am I misunderstanding something here?

Huh.... could be interesting.

As a New Yorker, Mamdani is my second choice, but my first choice is not polling so great so Mamdani might get my vote, and that could be how he wins the race.

If that happens, I could easily see the DNC going hard against rank voting in the future. A virtual nobody beat a former Governor. Rank voting is good for democracy bad for the establishment.

Mamdani and Cuomo are both good at rallying first-choice voters but struggling with second-choice voters, it's basically a battle of who least alienates the people who don't like them already.

To be fair, it's New York City. They only elect pieces of shit for mayor, so even if Mamdani wins then it's just a matter of time before a skeleton in his closet is discovered that makes Cuomo look like a saint by comparison.

Mamdani peaked at the right moment. I didn't take that PPP poll seriously but maybe there was something to it if Emerson sees the same thing.

>2025
>Polls

LMAO

I'm hoping this i true. Cuomo's last polls are out of date and things could change.

Please let that fucking creep lose

We had a week-long gap in polling and the 2nd debate has settled in. It may have hurt Cuomo.

Lander's cross-endorsement and arrest may have been the kingmaker.

When's the primary being held?

Tomorrow

Here's hoping the heat wave will keep the seniors from voting tomorrow.

Come on baby, need something to celebrate and a Cuomo to dunk on

There aren't any further polls dropping today that I'm aware of. Unless Marist or Siena wants to surprise us.

SecretBase posted...

Mamdani and Cuomo are both good at rallying first-choice voters but struggling with second-choice voters, it's basically a battle of who least alienates the people who don't like them already.

Hmm

Ones a progressive whose most extreme policies will be tampered

One is a serial sexual harasser owned by AIPAC

Tough choice

LightSnake posted...

I'm hoping this i true. Cuomo's last polls are out of date and things could change.

Please let that fucking creep lose

Sadly I think he'll run 3rd party on his dumbass Fight and Deliver party. And then when the left vote is split, he'll cite the loss as proof the Democratic party has failed

lilORANG posted...

>2025
>Polls

LMAO

Yeah yeah but the polls are bad enough for Cuomo that he is launching some aggressive smear campaigns on him blatantly lying to the Jewish voters about Mamdani being antisemitic.

Had Cuomo received any money from AIPAC?

LightSnake posted...

Had Cuomo received any money from AIPAC?

Not sure for this election, but you don't even have to consider the AIPAC middleman for this one, Cuomo was literally on Netanyahu's legal defense team against the International Criminal Court last year.

SecretBase posted...

Not sure for this election, but you don't even have to consider the AIPAC middleman for this one, Cuomo was literally on Netanyahu's legal defense team against the International Criminal Court last year.

Im aware. Not what I asked.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I can't imagine it surprised you though.

https://bsky.app/profile/zohrankmamdani.bsky.social/post/3lsbub2tca22a

Voted early on Sunday - listed Mamdani as #1 and Lander as #2. The remaining 3 were some combination of Adrienne Adams, Zellnor Myrie, and Michael Blake (I honestly forget the order).

I left sex pest Cuomo off the list (obviously), I left his supporter Jessica Ramos off the list, I left hedge fund manager Whitney Tilson off the list (we do not need more charter school-loving billionaires in politics), and I left Scott Stringer off the list (he is progressive, but there are candidates who haven't bee linked to sexual misconduct).

SSj4Wingzero posted...

Voted early on Sunday - listed Mamdani as #1 and Lander as #2. The remaining 3 were some combination of Adrienne Adams, Zellnor Myrie, and Michael Blake (I honestly forget the order).

I left sex pest Cuomo off the list (obviously), I left his supporter Jessica Ramos off the list, I left hedge fund manager Whitney Tilson off the list (we do not need more charter school-loving billionaires in politics), and I left Scott Stringer off the list (he is progressive, but there are candidates who haven't bee linked to sexual misconduct).

Whitney Tilson's also instructed people to rank Cuomo #2, so he's made clear he's up to no good.

Excellent. It would be cool to see NYC elect someone who isn't a piece of shit.

The DNC establishment wants Cuomo. They are going to make it happen.

Charismic_Zach_Gowen posted...

One is a serial sexual harasser owned by AIPAC

Fuck, he's gonna win ain't he?

https://xcancel.com/MichaelLangeNYC/status/1937241111086457204?t=D2acsIRuv9fZv01cPODa5w&s=19

Optimism increasing

RndmNmber1 posted...

Fuck, he's gonna win ain't he?

Ive asked where AIPAC has given cuomo money or owns him. Nobody seems to be able to provide this info

LightSnake posted...

Ive asked where AIPAC has given cuomo money or owns him. Nobody seems to be able to provide this info

Thing is so much of Cuomo's funding goes through the Fix the City super PAC that it'd be hard to dig up whether AIPAC is actually boosting his campaign or not.

AIPAC involvement is usually identified through their recruitment efforts or ads. They didn't need to recruit Cuomo and he has his own PAC for ads.

But really people just use AIPAC as a US-based stand-in for Israel, even if they were technically not involved themelves the intent is obviously just to claim Cuomo serves Israel.

Cuomo being a gross sex pest is enough for me to keep him off my ballot.

SecretBase posted...

Thing is so much of Cuomo's funding goes through the Fix the City super PAC that it'd be hard to dig up whether AIPAC is actually boosting his campaign or not.

AIPAC involvement is usually identified through their recruitment efforts or ads. They didn't need to recruit Cuomo and he has his own PAC for ads.

But really people just AIPAC as a US-based stand-in for Israel, even if they were technically not involved themelves the intent is obviously just to claim Cuomo serves Israel.

Maybe one day you guys will figure out how this actually sounds to Jews when you use "OWNED BY AIPAC" for any politician you dislike even if they're not getting any money from them.

LightSnake posted...

Maybe one day you guys will figure out how this actually sounds to Jews when you use "OWNED BY AIPAC" for any politician you dislike even if they're not getting any money from them.

Not that I care how suspicion over a brazenly tacky lobbyist PAC comes off to random people, but I guess it's fair to concede that AIPAC probably wouldn't involve itself with a non-Congressional/presidential election for obvious reasons (a city mayor has no command of US-Israel foreign relations).

LightSnake posted...

Maybe one day you guys will figure out how this actually sounds to Jews when you use "OWNED BY AIPAC" for any politician you dislike even if they're not getting any money from them.

Can't speak about Cuomo in particular here, but politicians getting money from a PAC that's focused on a foreign country should be an issue. It's obvious AIPAC and Israel have some sort of control over many politicians. Are we not supposed to be bothered by this?

RobertMuldoon posted...

Can't speak about Cuomo in particular here, but politicians getting money from a PAC that's focused on a foreign country should be an issue. It's obvious AIPAC and Israel have some sort of control over many politicians. Are we not supposed to be bothered by this?

I never cease to be amazed at the lack of self reflection in this

LightSnake posted...

I never cease to be amazed at the lack of self reflection in this

Answer the question.

RobertMuldoon posted...

Can't speak about Cuomo in particular here, but politicians getting money from a PAC that's focused on a foreign country should be an issue. It's obvious AIPAC and Israel have some sort of control over many politicians. Are we not supposed to be bothered by this?

The point isn't that AIPAC having influence isn't bad. Many agree that it's at the very minimum worrisome that a PAC with strong foreign-interest being that important is a problem.

The point is that blindly claiming a politician is owned by AIPAC without actual evidence feeds into the antisemitic "Jews run the world" stereotype.

Now if you wanted to say that Cuomo has strong ties to Netanyahu and the Israeli government and that concerns you, by all means do so. There is evidence to support that. But leave the AIPAC accusations to the candidates that are actively receiving AIPAC funds.

RobertMuldoon posted...

Answer the question.

R.I.P.

I love it

Compsognathus posted...

The point isn't that AIPAC having influence isn't bad. Many agree that it's at the very minimum worrisome that a PAC with strong foreign-interest being that important is a problem.

The point is that blindly claiming a politician is owned by AIPAC without actual evidence feeds into the antisemitic "Jews run the world" stereotype.

Now if you wanted to say that Cuomo has strong ties to Netanyahu and the Israeli government and that concerns you, by all means do so. There is evidence to support that. But leave the AIPAC accusations to the candidates that are actively receiving AIPAC funds.

That's why I mentioned I can't speak about Cuomo. That's all understandable, but someone like LS defends AIPAC like it's not what it is. That's my issue. And pairing AIPAC to actual anti-Semitism is a problem. Saying politicians who take AIPAC money is not the same as "Jews run the world".

Compsognathus posted...

The point is that blindly claiming a politician is owned by AIPAC without actual evidence feeds into the antisemitic "Jews run the world" stereotype.

It doesn't to anyone with a rational mind. AIPAC is a political action committee acting on behalf of a foreign government. Being wrong about the role it serves doesn't suddenly make someone bigoted. There is no need to bring ethnicity or religion into the matter when they were not mentioned and are not relevant.

RobertMuldoon posted...

Answer the question.

Representing AIPAC as a unique evil when most of it (really, petty much all of it) is US citizens who have Israel as a major political issue for them and AIPAC has frequently and famously not gotten its way in many circumstances. People on the left, for some reason, would rather just use age old antisemitism, just sub in "AIPAC" or plausible deniability.

If you think some people don't twig to that when they hear "AIPAC owns" a politician they don't even donate to, and then cover it up with "Well, AIPAC is still bad," well so's George Soros but people on the left don't have an issue calling out the RIght using him the same way

SecretBase posted...

It doesn't to anyone with a rational mind. AIPAC is a political action committee acting on behalf of a foreign government. Being wrong about the role it serves doesn't suddenly make someone bigoted. There is no need to bring ethnicity or religion into the matter when they were not mentioned and are not relevant.

Hey, Secret? You're not Jewish and you don't really have a right to say what is and isn't antisemitic.

this is verbatim the same shit conservatives do when they use when they bring up Soros. Another huge issue on the Left is abandoning all the principles of listen to marginalized people when they tell you something you said was bigoted, micro aggressions are wrong, impact surpasses intent when Jews say they were impacted. Goes right out the window actually

LightSnake posted...

Representing AIPAC as a unique evil when most of it (really, petty much all of it) is US citizens who have Israel as a major political issue for them and AIPAC has frequently and famously not gotten its way in many circumstances. People on the left, for some reason, would rather just use age old antisemitism, just sub in "AIPAC" or plausible deniability.

If you think some people don't twig to that when they hear "AIPAC owns" a politician they don't even donate to, and then cover it up with "Well, AIPAC is still bad," well

When it's a politician who doesn't take AIPAC money, sure. If politicians or political parties take AIPAC money, saying AIPAC or Israel owning them is pretty much true. There's no anti-Semitism intended there, but others want to conflate the two. If a politician takes Chinese or Russian money, then those countries own them too.

LightSnake posted...

Hey, Secret? You're not Jewish and you don't really have a right to say what is and isn't antisemitic.

Unrelated, but if what you say were true the German government wouldn't be making it into law that criticism of the state of Israel is antisemitic

LightSnake posted...

Representing AIPAC as a unique evil when most of it (really, petty much all of it) is US citizens who have Israel as a major political issue for them and AIPAC has frequently and famously not gotten its way in many circumstances.

It's unique in scope. The primary against Bowman was the most funded district election in US history and he got flushed out in spending 17 to 1. This is like complaining about people blaming more things on Donald Trump than on Ron DeSantis; yes they're both similarly bad but one has their hands in far more cookie jars with far greater severity.

teep_ posted...

Unrelated, but if what you say were true the German government wouldn't be making it into law that criticism of the state of Israel is antisemitic

how on earth is that relevant here? This isnt a discussion on German laws. And plenty of Jews are firmly against that bullshit, myself included. I am saying when someone says this guy is owned by AIPAC despite receiving no money from them, that hits very different
RobertMuldoon posted...

When it's a politician who doesn't take AIPAC money, sure. If politicians or political parties take AIPAC money, saying AIPAC or Israel owning them is pretty much true. There's no anti-Semitism intended there, but others want to conflate the two. If a politician takes Chinese or Russian money, then those countries own them too.

cuomo hasnt taken money from AIPAC that I have been able to see, so not only is that not relevant but most AIPaC money is, again, from American citizens.

Also, I don't even want to hear "if a politician takes Chinese or Russian money" when people defended Tulsi Gabbard when she accepted money from a Syrian fascist party to meet with and give free propaganda to Assad.

LightSnake posted...

how on earth is that relevant here?

It's not, which is why I said so in my post. Just me complaining, I guess

SecretBase posted...

It's unique in scope. The primary against Bowman was the most funded district election in US history and he got flushed out in spending 17 to 1. This is like complaining about people blaming more things on Donald Trump than on Ron DeSantis; yes they're both similarly bad but one has their hands in far more cookie jars with far greater severity.

bowman, literally yesterday, posted on Instagram that losing because of jewish voters was a plot because they buy elections. You could not have picked a worst example.

bowman got washed because hes an unserious clown 9/11 conspiracy and atrocity denier in New York. Maybe Jewish voters were mad he downplayed 10/7 more than wicked AIPAC mind controllled everyone but that might require some self reflection

teep_ posted...

It's not, which is why I said so in my post. Just me complaining, I guess

Yeah, I'm against that too, and German laws on that are absurd.