The federal corruption indictment against New York mayor Eric Adams suggests his victory didn’t reflect a popular consensus on law and order and austerity — it was a product of alleged straw donor fraud that gave him a huge cash advantage in a tight primary.
  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    244·
    2 months ago

    Ok, but let’s not pretend that people didn’t vote for the guy. He should be prosecuted for his crimes, but he won the primary and he won the election. If we don’t like how elections work, we should change that, but acting like he doesn’t represent the will of the people because he took shady money is a retcon. The primary was a RCV that ran through 8 instant runoffs, resulting in every single ballot preference counting, and Eric Adams won by 8,000 votes. If you take his money away, maybe Kathryn Garcia, another moderate centrist, would have won instead.

    • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
      11·
      2 months ago

      The only reason he ended up the Democratic nominee is because New York City voters did not understand ranked choice voting during the primary. It was the first year it was instituted, and there was absolutely no public education campaign to teach people what the hell it was or how it worked.

      Kathryn Garcia should’ve been the nominee, and nearly was. Had she been, she would have won easily. and considering the campaign finance violations, Eric Adams committed, it’s no wonder he had an advantage.

      She was my number one vote. I was so so angry when she didn’t win the primary. And I really had to hold my nose to vote for Eric Adams. Everyone knew he was a piece of shit at the top of the election, but he was a lot better than Curtis Silwa.

      Edit: Michelle Gomez -> Kathryn Garcia — sorry for that half-awake mistake!