Unknown

From the New York Times, this is the interview I'm Lulu Garcia Navarro and today I'm talking to New York City Mayor Zoraan Mamdani. In his first six months in office, Mayor Mamdani has been riding high and has begun delivering on the issue that defined his campaign affordability. He's frozen the rent on nearly a million apartments and he's made progress on universal childcare. What's more, he's recently endorsed a slate of progressive congressional candidates who swept their New York primaries to the dismay of the Democratic political establishment. Of course Mamdani has many, many critics, but he's now undeniably a national political force. So just how does he plan on using all this power? Here's my conversation with New York City Mayor Zoraan Mamdani. Welcome to the interview. Thank you so much for being here. I really appreciate you coming here today on a day of the World Cup. I don't know if you heard some of my colleagues cheering in this. I think there's about 20 minutes left in the French game. Yeah, yeah. So sorry that we're interrupting perhaps your viewing of course, but yeah, I appreciate the time. I was going to do this whole interview without mentioning President Trump. But as often happens, he tends to enter the chat regardless of one's intentions. And President Trump recently shared a video by Michael Savage who's a pro-Trump pundit calling for you to be criminalized and deported. And my question is, what does it mean when the President of the United States shares a sentiment like that? And how do you deal with it? Yeah, I think that it's part of the corrosion of political and public life. That this is, frankly, something that I don't even blink at anymore because it's become in many ways a norm on the last few years. And I also think that Americans are hungry for a very different kind of politics. One where disagreement is a part of it, deportation and demonization is not. Does it worry you that it is normal and that by not reacting, it normalizes it more? Or do you worry that he's trying to go do you into reacting? I don't want to be part of the sort of cycle of that. I'm just wondering how you calculated. I think that for all of the fear mongering around democratic socialism, the best response is to show what it actually means. And what we've shown over the last six months is exactly that. We've shown that a city with a democratic socialist vision is one that paves more than 170,000 bottles, 50,000 more than the prior administration by this point. It's a city that has delivered the lowest recorded number of shootings and shooting victims and murders in New York City's history. It is a city that is on a pathway to universal childcare, saving thousands of parents more than $20,000 a year. And it's a city that is doing all of these things while fighting for the people who are often left behind, workers who we've secured more than $10 million for tenants, more than $64 million. These are all indicators of what is so scary to a right wing that has built its entire power and framework on the idea of debating who should be left behind. One last question on this. When these kinds of attacks against you, and I can hear you deliberately not trying to personalize it, not trying to respond to it, but does it impact you and your security, for example? I mean, we've seen other people who get targeted like this verbally. It has an actual impact. There's more threats. There's more focus. So there are threats, the kinds of which that sadly became familiar over the course of the campaign. I am lucky in that I'm protected by the best of the best in our NYPD, and I'm also concerned because if these threats have changed my life and have changed the lives of those that I love, I often wonder about the threats to those whose names we don't even know, because what is so terrifying about the normalization of political violence is not even just those to whom it's directed towards, but what it makes acceptable towards any other in this city and this country, and that is a real fear that I have as we try and show what a city can look like where everyone belongs, that there are those firmly invested in a kind of division that is at odds with that. Did you at some point have to make peace with the fact that you are a target? I don't know if you can make peace with it. I think you can come to expect it. You can come to rationalize it as if it is part of what it is that you do. And look, I grew up and I would hear politicians say things about their family, how they didn't sign up for it this time and the other, and when you're on the outside and you're hearing that it sounds at a certain point to be quite cliché, and when you're living it, you realize the depth of that sentiment that we sign up for public life, shouldn't mean that we sign up for threats or violence, but at least we made a choice. And then there are those that we love who did not make a choice other than to love us, and yet somehow those threats that violence also becomes a part of their life, and it has seeped into the lives of many more people across the city, across the country. And I grew up in New York City. To me, disagreeing is one of the most New York things you can do. Sometimes you'll hear two people, and it sounds like they're fighting, but that's just how they say I love you in New York City. And so it's not to say that we shouldn't have that kind of disagreement or dissent or debate, and even that it not be vehement, but what it has become instead, it actually silences that debate out of fear. We're talking a few weeks after some pretty big political victories for you. You went out on a limb and endorsed several Democratic Socialist candidates who then won their primaries, and after they won, you said you wanted to send a national message. And it sounded like you want to clearly be heard beyond New York City. Why? You know, we are in some ways distinct here in New York City. We are the wealthiest city in the wealthiest country in the history of the world. And I also know that the struggles of working people here in this city, a city where one and four are living in poverty, are not unique. I know that working people across this country are facing those same struggles. And for too long, it has felt like our party, the Democratic party, that the only answer we have is to say that we are not the Republican party. The only answer we have is a response to the cruelty of the federal administration, but we also have to have a vision of what comes after this administration. And I think that at the heart of that has to be a vision for that working person. And that's why I think it is so critical to speak about that not just here in New York City, but frankly, anywhere where those people are struggling. And you feel like because of your position in the party, you are at this point, one of the most visible people that you are the person to impart that. I think that message, frankly, is coming from New Yorkers themselves. And we should listen to them when they vote for Darialisa, for Claire, for Brad, when they vote for all five of the state legislative candidates that endorse that won their races. So much of what has often been discussed as if it is an intellectual debate is in fact something that can change the material reality of working New Yorkers. And I think that's what's been so incredible about being able to serve as the mayor of the greatest city in the world is it's a chance to show that you can fight for the people that the right has left behind. And you can do it by asking yourself, what are the challenges they face? And then asking your team, how can we deliver on those things? Do you see yourself as a Democrat or a Democratic Socialist? Because you said our party and obviously you ran as a Democrat. I am both. I am a Democrat and I'm a Democratic Socialist. And I think that so much of what makes me proud to be a Democrat is looking at what our party used to stand for. And you think about the four freedoms, you think about FDR, you think about the New Deal. Those are at the core of what our party's identity is. And yet it feels like to experience it, you have to read about it. You can't see it around you anymore. And that isn't something that I'm willing to accept. And I know that many feel similarly. I'm curious how you are planning to use your political capital. I mean, are you planning on getting involved in races outside of New York? Eventually. My focus right now is on New York City. But eventually. I would say that. For now, this is where I'm looking because I think that you've ever seen that New York recovery. But you keep on answering this question in this particular way. And I understand why, but if you have some momentum and if you're wanting to send this message beyond New York, the question obviously is. how and when. I am still seeing the world like that cover of the New Yorker where it's New York, it's New Jersey, and then it's the rest of the world. I think that my focus is on doing the work here, but I also think that New Yorkers have sent a message, and we've also seen that it's not specific in that we've seen these kinds of victories in New Jersey, in Colorado, in California. When it comes to my endorsements, I was proud to make those eight endorsements, and I'm excited to see what they do next. After those endorsements, you said 2028 begins now. I mean, what role would you like to play in 2028? I think to continue to be honest about the struggles that New Yorkers are facing, and the importance of a vision that responds to them. And you know, sometimes politics feels like it's a hobby only some can afford, and I don't want it to be that way. Politics determines what people can afford, and we need to see a recognition of that, and an actual platform of how we will deliver that affordability. We in fact have to be able to say, what are you going to do about housing? What are you going to do about childcare? What are you going to do about the cost of groceries? And I think what's so exciting is that cities have often been discussed as the laboratories of democracy, that we can actually show that this isn't a fantasy. I think there's cheers going on. I'm not sure what's happened. We'll find out later. We'll find out. I think Spain probably won. Who were you rooting for? I was thankfully a little unengaged in today's game. A lot of the teams I rooted for, they tend to lose. But now is the time for favorites. I want to stay on this just a little bit longer because one of the people who is rumored to be considering a run for president is obviously Alexandria Acastro Cortez, and there's been reporting that you coordinated with AOC in your New York endorsements. Do you consider that to be a partnership? Absolutely. I consider it to be a partnership, and I also consider her to be an inspiration. I had the privilege of having been represented by her in Congress before I was the mayor. I was an assembly member in an overlapping part of her congressional district in Australia and Long Island City, and I think she has shown what it looks like to fight for working people. Do you consider an alliance sort of going forward that she would endorse, you know, Abdul-Assad and, you know, Michigan and elsewhere, and you endorse here in New York? I think that she makes her own decisions, and I think that there are decisions that many of us look to and are inspired by, and I'm excited to continue to work together because, for a long time, politics has been understood as if it is about individuals, and what's so exciting is that at the heart of that partnership is a belief in the collective, and even if you think about the greatest mayor I would argue in New York City's history, it's Fiora Laguardia. He could not have achieved what he did without the partnership of FDR, and that dream of having partners is also what drove me to make the decision to endorse those three congressional candidates, because you can't fulfill an affordability agenda for the most expensive city in the country without partners at every level of government. So it's interesting that you mentioned that partnership with FDR. Would you endorse AOC for President if she rides? Because that obviously would be a very clear partnership. I'm excited to see what decision she makes. In terms of endorsements, the ones that I'm focused on are the ones that I've just made. I mean, there's been some recent disagreement in the DSA, the Democratic Socialists of America, your party. What is the socialists without disagreement? Yeah, surrounding her endorsement. Do you think you would endorse her independently of your party? Well, first I would say DSA is an organization, and my party is the Democratic party, and my organization is DSA. And I would say that I'm still very much focused in this year, but I do believe that we all have to take a step back and appreciate what it is that she means to so many across this country, and the reason for it is the work that she has done. I think she'd make a good president. I think she would make a good anything. I think she's a great congresswoman. I think no matter what she decides to do, she's going to bring those same qualities to whatever that work is. So we've talked about your endorsements, and I would like to talk in particular about Darylisa Avela-Chevalier, who ran successfully against Adriana Espé at the head of the Hispanic Caucus. You know, he's a former undocumented immigrant. He has strong progressive credentials, dismantle eyes, supportive of Medicare for all. Did you privately promise him that you were going to support his reelection campaign during your campaign for mayor? I told him that I appreciated his support when he endorsed me in the general election after I won the Democratic primary, and the promise that I made to New Yorkers was to use any tool that I had to further that affordability agenda. And in Darylisa, I see a congressional candidate soon to be a congresswoman who will be someone who really has built a campaign on a vision of babies not bombs. And I think that that speaks to what it means to invest in affordability, and also reckon with the bankruptcy that has typified a lot of our politics, especially when it comes to our foreign policy. And you were asking me earlier about political capital. To me, I think the point of political capital is to spend it to deliver material change. And these are not intellectual arguments. These are the ones that will determine whether or not these districts look different in the years to come. When it comes to Darylisa's district, this is one of the poorest congressional districts in the United States of America. And as I walked that district with her, we were discussing the amount of money that our federal government sends in the billions of dollars to the Israeli military. And as we were doing so, a man came out of a bodega with his hands full with two packages of huggies. And you see what the priorities are of people living in the district. And yet you see what the priorities are of federal policy that represents the district. And you see this chasm. And the more that you tolerate that kind of a chasm, the more that you tell people that politics is something that they shouldn't deem as if relevant to their life, something to now, as opposed to something to be a part of. I mean, it's interesting that you mentioned Israel because is the reason you didn't endorse Espayat his relationship with APAC, the pro-Israel lobby, his longtime support of Israel, was that like sort of the seminal thing that for you was a differentiator? I think these are all important factors. I think the need for moral clarity in our politics to quote Congressman Ocasio-Cortez is something that speaks to a wide variety of policies and also applies to our foreign policy when it comes to the funding of the Israeli military. And you saw in the final weeks of that race, APAC spending a significant amount of money to try and stop Daria Lisa. And what you see when you speak to the constituents of that district is a very different hope and vision for the place they call home and also the country that they've helped to build. And it's hard to explain to a New Yorker why their needs are not even being discussed. And yet we have billions of dollars to kill civilians halfway across the world. I mean, earlier, we were talking about the World Cup and, you know, we'll be watching the games here and then you'll look to the news and you'll find that even someone who had gone to Gaza on a relief mission to set up watch parties was then killed by the Israeli military. There is no respite from a genocide, no matter even in a moment of joy for the entire world. I want to understand your point of view on what political weight you give the Israeli issue because you are very clear about where you stand. But I'm wondering how you apply it to sort of how you look at other political actors. The left wing streamer Hassan Piker recently said, and I'm quoting here, someone who will not say the truth about Israel's genocide will not stand with you and fight for you for your health care for your housing. It's that simple. Do you agree with that statement? I think what we have seen from New Yorkers, what we have seen from Americans, when we talk about this hunger for a new kind of politics, it's a hunger to move beyond the bankruptcy that characterizes a lot of politics today. And it is hard to find a more bankrupt policy approach than what our country has done to Gaza and to Palestine and how it hasn't been specific to any one party. It's been again and again, an insistence to tell New Yorkers and to tell Americans that what they are seeing is not something they should in fact either be concerned by or believe in. And when you talk about the rupture in trust that comes from that, it is hard to then turn to another issue and say, believe me here. And what I've found time and again is that that trust, you have to be able to maintain it. It's not to say that you have to agree on everything, but there has to be an honesty. And too often you'll find that there are far more Congress people who will privately tell you that something is a genocide than publicly announce it to be so. And so long as there's an understanding of a difference in what people believe and what they're willing to say, there will be a skepticism and frankly a despair amongst those considering whether or not to engage themselves in politics. So should the litmus test for a politician who wants to be part of your coalition, be their views on the Gaza War and their commitment to calling it a genocide? I think it's an important part. I wouldn't say that there's a specific litmus test as to creating a cookie cutter of a person that I would endorse in anyone which seat. What I would say is that you have to have a clear vision of being able to describe things as they are and being able to fight for that which working people have been denied. But can it include those who support Israel and support America's support of Israel? I think when you asked me earlier of what is my party? I've said the Democratic Party. I'm asking you though. Yes, and my point is. Not what's in the Democratic Party, but understood. Yeah. My point is that the importance of a big tent, it's critical not just in how we describe ourselves as what we belong to, but also that we can work with those with whom we might not have agreement on every single issue. You can even see in the administration that I've put together, it's not an administration where at every job interview I ask someone, what are your thoughts about Israel and Palestine? Frankly, it has very little to do with most of the things that I'm hiring for. What we want is to show that you are looking for expertise, you are looking to deliver on the ambition of your policy platform and to build a team that's able to do so. And when it comes to my endorsements of congress members or those running for state legislative seats, they have to show a vision of the world that speaks to that despair and also addresses how you would actually deliver something different. And you felt that Espaya didn't do that. No. One other question on this former vice president and presidential candidate Kamala Harris called you recently, she's reportedly reaching out to pro-Palestinian groups or people with pro-Palestinian views, she's considering another one for president reportedly. As Biden's VP, she is closely associated with America's supportive Israel during the Gaza war. Do you think she can regain trust on that issue? I think that the first step for anyone looking to run is to be honest about what we see today and what it would take to change that. And when I say what it would take, one of the common features between all of the people that I endorse for congress was that each one of these candidates spoke about how they would sign on to the block the bombs legislation. It speaks about an unwillingness to continue to be complicit in a genocide. And we're talking about billions of dollars in material support. So I think the first step for any presidential candidate looking to earn the trust of people across the country is a recognition of what our policy has wrought and what a different policy would deliver. Did you hear that from her? I think that everyone is early in their considerations, and I truly appreciated the vice president reaching out. And I think that it is a critical part of this early stage. You know, pro-Palestinian voices were not allowed to speak at all during her 2024 democratic convention. I've heard a lot from people in the activist community around that. They felt very betrayed by the fact that they were not allowed to engage publicly. That their voices, they felt were silenced. How damaging do you think that was for her? I think what people wanted in that moment was to know that their voice too belonged in this party that we call home. And I remember following along here from New York City and just refreshing Twitter as I would see for the updates and Ruaro Man and a number of others who were gathered outside hopeful that their voice would be heard. And what I'm thankful for is that now today that voice is being heard. And it's being heard not only because there are those who have it that are entering into the halls of Congress, but also because those who have long stood up for the belief in a universality when it comes to human rights are now being treated as core parts of a political conversation whereas before it wasn't even a conversation that was often permitted to be had. Do you think the democratic party can become the party of Palestinian rights? I think it can become the party of human rights for all people and that must also include Palestinians. I think people are tired of exceptions being drawn and we know that in politics the more often you draw an exception the more likely you are to draw another one and people want consistency. They want to know that when they speak to you they don't have to call you the next day to see if the wind is blowing differently how you're going to answer them but that they can trust you that this is something that you in fact do believe in. Last question on this topic. Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is perhaps planning to visit New York for the UN General Assembly. You pledge during your campaign and after you want to order his arrest to comply with the International Criminal Court warrant. What will happen if he comes in September? I believe that Prime Minister Netanyahu belongs in the Hague. He's a war criminal who has been charged by the International Criminal Court and what you will find is that is an opinion that is held by many purely because of what his actions have brought over these last many years. I've also said that I will follow the laws that we have here in New York City because I believe that there is an importance in following the law as a leader who presides over our city and that's something that I plan to do. Meaning I'm sorry I don't understand what that means. Meaning that whatever the law allows me to do in New York City that's what we will do but we won't be writing our own laws to that end. What does the law allow you to do? That's an active conversation with our legal department in seeing what the prospects are we have here in our municipality. However, what we've seen at the national level is a desire sometimes to write your own laws to go outside of the bounds of legality. That's not something we have an interest in. I mean normally when people come to a UN General Assembly they're granted a sort of amnesty because it is the seat of the United Nations. Is that what you're thinking that you'll honor or you're actively looking to see if you can actually arrest him? I think we are looking at all of our legal obligations and one of them is with regards to the United Nations but the other part of this is we're not talking about a personal assessment of Benjamin Netanyahu. We're talking about the International Criminal Court and the fact that they have a warrant out for this Prime Minister's arrest and I think it's important to talk about the weight that that has as a charge and also that as the mayor of New York City I'll be following the laws of New York City. Okay. One of the things that I really wanted to ask you about also was an understanding of your sort of broader vision for your coalition now that you're getting involved in federal races because Daria Lisa again Avila Shevalier has a particular view of immigration. She rejects all deportations even of violent criminals. She called borders a philosophical concept. How do you view, for example, the issue of border security? What border policy should America have? You know, should immigrants be able to claim asylum at the US-Mexico border? Should they be able to enter the country while their claims are being reviewed? I think some of what you're describing is answered by the law and I believe that we should follow the law when it comes to asylum cases. I also believe that we should have a border policy that both is secure and one that is also defined by some humanity. You know, when we talk about immigration, it's often bandied about as just a political subject for debate. ICE is an agency that has terrorized Americans across this country and others that live in this country. Just the other day, a man wasn't even 30 years old, said goodbye to his wife and his child, and moments later was shot by ICE agents in Maine. This was not even a month after a man was killed in Texas. So when we're talking about all of this, I often think about it through a prism of legality, consistency, and humanity, and an understanding that immigration policy doesn't just affect those without status. It affects an entire city. You know, I went to Dominican Barbershop in Harlem and the owner was telling me that everyone in the barbershop had status. They all had status and yet most of them were terrified to come to work because they know that for so much of ICE's operations, it has little to do with legality. It has to do with profiling and it has to do with a vision of creating the largest deportation machine this country has ever seen, and of a notion of this country where so many of us who call it home would have no place in it any longer. I think the issue of deportations is when you've been pretty consistent on I'm trying to understand what your idea of the border would be because obviously the people you endorsed in federal races will have an impact on any legislation to do with the border. And the Democratic Party has struggled gaining support over its border policies, considering what happened under the Biden administration where you had the border as some would describe it being overrun, millions of people coming in in an unauthorized fashion. And that had impacts here in New York City. A lot of the city was overstretched, resources. were overrun and it made people very unhappy, so I would just like to understand what a humane border policy looks like for you. I don't believe that secure and humane are at odds. I don't believe that the only way to provide immigration enforcement is through ice. I think oftentimes we are forced into these false choices. So do you have asylum seekers be able to, you know, for example, ask for asylum at the U.S. Mexico border? What is the law today? What are they legally entitled to do? I mean, the law today, I mean under President Trump, the law today is that they're not. But in terms of international obligations in terms of pre-existing. And that is and that is meant that the border has seen a dramatic drop in illegal crossings. So I guess that is the tension that a lot of people see. I think that what we've found from the Republican administration has been a desire to make any and all immigration illegal. And I sit before you as one of the first immigrant mayors of our city in generations. I lead a city where of eight and a half million people more than three million are immigrants. And so when we're talking about legitimate claims to asylum, I think that those should be honored. When we're talking about immigration enforcement, I think that it should be humane. I talk about our pride in being a sanctuary city in terms of the policies that we practice. I'll give you an example of those policies. We are willing to work with the federal government on more than 170 serious crimes if someone has been convicted of them. What we are unwilling to do is to participate in civil immigration enforcement with a federal government that has said openly it wants to deport a vast majority of people for crimes that we will never even know. That is where I think I see the tension. Have you ever been to the US Mexico border? No. After the break, Mayor Mamdani on how he defines the working class. I mean, I haven't sat at home and asked myself where it starts and stops. What I would say is for those who are working to try and afford the basic dignities of life and aren't able to do so, I think that that is also a working class. You've been in office for half a year. You have very high approval ratings, 58% in New York City, according to the most recent Siena poll. That is a number that has actually gone up, which I think is unusual in our current political moment. You've made strides on two out of your three central campaign promises, a start on universal childcare, the rent freeze, free buses are not there yet, but you've just launched a whole new project on making the bus faster. 175 routes up to six minutes saved per week. I think people find it hardening that you nerd out on this stuff. Because it makes a difference. Sometimes we treat these like statistics, but think about for an average in New Yorker, what they could do with 12 more minutes if they're taking a bus to and from. As I was thinking about your project and the ambitions that you have laid out to the city, I was wondering, and I know this is a little bit of an absurd question, but come on. Come on, let's do it. Let's do absurdity. But if you had a magic wand, no, but real, I know this sounds like a little bit absurd, but I do think it speaks to if money was no object and you could enact anything, what would you do? I'd be doing the same things I'm doing now. Come on. It would just be a lot easier. But one thing that you could do. I think one thing I'm very passionate about is universal childcare. So that would be the thing. That would be the thing. And the reason that would be the thing is right now, in our city, to afford childcare for a two-year-old, as a family, you need to make $334,000. I'm a parent. That's an extraordinary amount of money. And that's an amount of money where, again, if you as a family are making $300,000, you're still not hitting it. And so what we've often described as success, if that is unable to meet the bare minimum of what it means to raise a family in the city, that's a real problem. And the reason I say is, you know, the faster is, obviously, we're talking about a multi-billion dollar investment. This year, we secured 1.2 billion. Gonna make childcare free for 2,000 kids this fall, 12,000 kids next fall, every single two-year-old by the end of four years. But if I had a magic wand and I could say Wingardium Leviosa or whatever spell were specifically referring to in this moment, yes, I would love to make it free in an instant without having to take the time of the years of building what's necessary to win that, but I think we're already showing it can make a real difference. How about you? What would you do? If I could do anything, that's a good question. What would I do if I could do absolutely anything? It's a hard question, isn't it? Yeah. Living my shoes for a minute. Yeah, I'm gonna live in your shoes for a minute. I mean, personally, more park space, more outdoor space. I thought I couldn't get that question wrong and now I feel like I did. Yeah, just, I mean, living in cities and having seen other cities that are livable, the places where you can gather and feel like you can breathe and be outside and give you respite. What's your favorite park in New York City? What's my favorite central park? This is not, this is me interviewing you. I should know my lane. Stay in your lane, Miriam Donnie. I want to talk about New York's economy because much of it is built around Wall Street, finance, real estate. How important is it for you to have a good relationship with those sectors? And how would you say your relationship is with those sectors? I think it's important and what I have in common with leaders of those sectors, even amidst disagreements that will have over fiscal policy because I believe that we can raise taxes a little bit more on the wealthiest New Yorkers to ensure that everyone can afford life in the city. What brings us together is both a belief in the city and a commitment to its continued vitality. And on the other day, I went to the announcement of the new American Express headquarters at Two World Trade Center. And one thing that stood out to me was that these business leaders, they're not just making decisions on the basis of dollars and cents. They're also making decisions on the basis of investing in the city and in what the city represents. There's so many businesses that could have walked away from the city after 9/11. And they instead chose to double down in their commitment to it. I think everyone who has heard you talk about American Express and the banking. You seem like that's what I talk about. No, no, no, but you've talked about it recently and there are other big organizations that are going to be employing people and Thropic, etc., etc. Have wondered how does a democratic socialist like yourself view the role of business and private industry in the economy? I mean, what does a socialist economic development look like because the way you're talking, you sound like any capitalist mayor? Oh my god. Look, I think we have to go beyond the typical indicators of what makes a strong economy. I think we also have to measure whether a working person can breathe. And yes, it's the wealthiest city. And it's also city where one and four are living in poverty. So I will always celebrate continued investment in this city. And I'll also look to ensure that more and more New Yorkers can be a part of those benefits because when we talk about our vision for this city, the affordability agenda, it's that those who help build it can also live in it. And right now, there are so many working people where if you ask them where they live, they won't tell you a neighborhood across the five boroughs, they'll tell you a neighboring state, they'll tell you they live in Jersey City, they'll tell you they live in Connecticut, they'll tell you they live in Pennsylvania. And I think that's how a city becomes a museum, not a living breathing testament to the possibility of working people. And I'll just tell you, please, no. What we've seen is in the first five months of this year, we had an addition of more than 21,000 jobs. What we saw in 2025 is that we had more than 48,000 jobs in the New York City metro area of any metro area in the country. It's the fastest growing one. And so we see that we're headed in the right direction. I mean, to know that the city's recent job numbers aren't particularly strong. The unemployment rate is comparatively high. Where do the good paying jobs come from? Because for example, I think it has been noted that you you have an appointed ahead of the economic crisis. development corporation, which is an important tool that New York City mayors have for development and job creation. And there has been a sense that perhaps that is sending a message to the business community that you aren't as interested in those kinds of partnerships, those public-private partnerships, as perhaps other mayors have been. I'm incredibly interested in them, and we are in the final processes of interviews for that role, and I'm also someone who believes that the decision you make is one that's important, not just for the narrative purposes, but for what that person can deliver, and that they should be someone that you're fully confident in exactly what it is they're going to bring to the table. What do you want them to bring to the table? I want them to bring a set of skills that can deliver on economic development in a way that goes beyond what we've seen in recent years. And what that means is someone who understands what we were saying earlier. The strength of an economy cannot just be measured by the statistics that we often use, but also of whether it is reaching working people who are typically left out of these kinds of conversations. And I will say that even amidst the search for a new head of our economic development corporation, the EDC continues to be one of our focuses, and they continue to do the work, especially when it comes to our agenda of delivering city-run grocery stores. That is work that is currently within the portfolio of EDC, and that they've done a very good job in moving forward. Let's talk about policing. Please. Well, absolutely. Murders and shootings are now at historic lows, but there is. I knew there was a butt coming. No, there's not a butt, there's a. There's another tension there that I think people are trying to understand. And the DSA has been very vocally skeptical of the tactics of the NYPD, and of your police commissioner, Jessica Tish. She stayed on from the Adams administration. She's a pro-Israel billionaire, she's a technocrat. She's been very successful at her job. And I am curious because you have been publicly very supportive of her, but you also just nick 600 new police officers. And it has been reported that part of the reason for that was because of complaints from the DSA. Do you see a tension between your organization and your police commissioner? Well, I think no matter who you're describing in that sequence, you're describing New Yorkers who care deeply about public safety. And in the many words that you were describing our police commissioner the two most important, I think, were very successful. And it comes back to when we're talking about the lowest number of murders and shootings and shooting victims in the recorded history of our city, that it means the world to New Yorkers, because it also means that there are far fewer tables where there's an empty seat. For fewer families, we're grief hovers over them every single day. And still, there is more work to be done because so long as there is crime, there is work to be done. And when it comes to the question of the size of our police force, I've said time and again that the police force that has delivered these kinds of record lows is the one that I trust to continue delivering that kind of public safety and that we're going to be able to do that while also delivering two command centers in the Bronx, the way that we do in Queens and Brooklyn and Manhattan, and also providing additional training to officers. And to be able to do that within our authorized headcount, that also comes as part of a focus across the agencies on how to deliver on savings at a time of inheriting a $12 billion fiscal deficit. I would like to ask you just your own personal evolution. If there has been an evolution because you came in saying that you're going to get rid of the strategic response group, that you are going to reduce the sort of enforcement of fair evasion and other small infractions that overwhelmingly impact people of color, meanwhile NYPD arrests of those kinds have sort of skyrocketed. And my question is, do you see yourself having evolved on some of these issues because obviously, as always, happens the reality of having to keep a very complicated large city like New York safe might be different than what you imagined coming into it? I don't. I ran on a vision where public safety would be something where New Yorkers need not be asked to choose between safety and justice. And yes, I spoke about the importance of disbanding the strategic response group, which is a group that is tasked with both responding to the exercising of the First Amendment at protests and responding to terror threats. And I said that I did not believe it was important and necessary to couple these two responses. They should in fact be decoupled. I continue to believe that. And I continue to have conversations with our police commissioner about how we can deliver on the separation of those responsibilities and do so in a way where we're keeping New Yorkers safe. And that is still a part of my agenda. And what is also critical to me is that we understand safety both in terms of response and also in terms of prevention. And so a lot of the work that we're also looking to do is address where are the areas where we see the highest levels of crime and what can it also look like to invest city resources and support into those same neighborhoods as well? And what about the arrests for small infractions, et cetera, et cetera? That seems to be flying in the face of the things that you had promised. I think that some of the arrest figures are actually not all that dissimilar from what we've seen in the prior year. However, what we are also making clear is we have a medium and long-term vision where we are going to allow police officers to focus on serious crime, exactly what they signed up to be a part of when they wanted to join this department. And I've said that when it comes especially to our response to instances of mental health across the city that that is work that still needs to be done to decouple that response that we have right now. How committed are you to Commissioner Tish in the sense of being part of your administration? Because you do have, you are very different philosophically. Yes, and I think part of what it means to be a New Yorker is to work with those with whom you may have a disagreement on one or two issues. But you ask yourself, what is the purpose of this relationship? It is to keep New Yorker safe, and that is something that we're delivering on. And anyone who works for me at this point, there's someone that I want to continue to work with tomorrow the day after that. Because it's critical that we are measured by the work that we do, not by whether or not there's a disagreement beyond that work. The reason that all this becomes important is precisely how we started this conversation, because you wanted to make New York the model nationally. And so how you think about policing, how you think about the partnerships with the economic class, have much more resonance because of your own interest in having that. Sort of resonate beyond the confines of New York City. I think my interest is more in delivering for New Yorkers, and in doing so, there is an example of what that can look like. And I will also say that when I was running for this office, I would hear time and again of what a catastrophe it would be if I were to win. When it came to capital flight, when it came to crime, and what we've seen is so much of what is fear mongered around has very little relationship to reality. And that's also an important reflection on what dominates a lot of our political discourse. It's as if it is just the worst possible fantasy someone could put forward that you have to answer for. And now today, what we have to answer for is what we're actually delivering for New Yorkers. Part of this discussion, of course, is the organization that you are part of, which is the DSA, and it's having a moment, right? I mean, they are being discussed in both good ways and bad to put it modally. And at the heart of it is this idea that they are fighting for the working class. And it made me wonder how do you define the working class, because there's also been a lot of debate around what is the working class now? And who is welcome at the table of the working class? I think if you have to work to pay your bills, I think that that is one definition of being a part of the working class. So is that like anyone with the, oh my goodness, and it's okay? It's just a bad cough. Have you had it checked out? I have. Okay. That's why I believe in Medicare for All, everyone can check it out. So that's everyone with the W2, is that kind of 1099s too? I think it's, it's, I'm less interested. So someone making $250,000 a year's working class? What I would say is for those who are working to try and afford the basic dignities of life, and aren't able to do so, I think that that is also a working class. And oftentimes we're asked of how we divide this country. I think there's only one majority in this country. It's the working class. That just doesn't ring true to me. What do you think? It's less what I think, and more that it just seems a very easy answer to what is a complicated question, because politically, if you're saying everyone is the working class or anyone that gets a salary is the working class, yes, that opens up your tent, but practically speaking, we are divided by income, and especially if you want to tax people where you draw those lines, matters. I've drawn it at about a million dollars a year. Okay. So, anyone under a million dollars a year in income is working class? That's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying in terms of the practicality when it comes to fiscal policy. Right. I think a lot of our politics has been a debate over who you leave out, and I'm more interested in debates of how you bring more in, and I think that that is it's part of what I'm looking to be a part of is a vision where people understand no matter what you call it, that there's room for them to. But yes, I do want to raise taxable people who make more than a million a year. It just feels like someone who is a janitor is going to feel some kind of way about that description if you're lumping them in with someone who is a lawyer. That feels like a distinction that might matter. Do you think everyone's in the same club? You know, when I was running, a lot of the questions I would face is what does it mean to be a democratic socialist? And I only bring that up because I think sometimes there's a fixation on a definition of something. And what I found is when I would knock on New Yorker's doors, they would just ask am I part of your vision? And it's not that everyone is making the same amount of money or spacing the same amount of struggle, but that they just want to know that is there any way for them to actually be able to work this hard and afford a good life in the city? I've noticed that when I'm trying to get specifics, you deflect to talking about what New Yorkers do and don't want, and I have found that politicians, my own experience, when I ask questions of them that tries, well, when you are the mayor of New York City, when I try to get them to define something and they don't want to do it, they use a very broad brush. And so what I am really, because I do think it's at the heart of a very important debate in this country. Look, I think to me, I've defined it to you as someone who works to afford their life. I also think no matter how you define it, we have an understanding that those who are struggling to afford their rent, struggling to afford their groceries, struggling to afford their childcare are the people who should be at the heart of our vision for what comes next. So the other issue that has been brought up a lot about the DSA is, of course, the vetting that's been taking place. And we've just seen Graham Platner's campaign in Maine implode over sexual assault allegations. And your top advisor, Morris Katz, was instrumental in running Platner's campaign. It's been a pretty huge mess. Has your faith in Katz diminished? Do you blame him in part for what happened? No. Why not? I think that, first I'll just say when I heard of the incredibly serious accusations that came forward and I was asked about what should happen next for that campaign, I said that it should come to an end. And I'm thankful that that is what we have seen over these last weeks. And I think when it comes to Morris, he's someone who puts together a way to help candidates who are fighting for that same vision of dignity for working people. And he and so many others agree that there is no room, there's no tolerance for sexual violence or sexual assault within the election. But there was a lot of signs along the way that Graham Platner had a problematic past. And so someone who was so instrumental in his campaign and in his rise, shouldn't he be judged for that? I think he should be judged by his decision at the end of it, which is to walk away from that campaign as soon as it was one that could be wrapped up. Two big picture questions about you and your organization and whatever coalition you're trying to build because you've clearly said you want to have people who you agree with or that support your vision in places of power that you can work with. There are moderates in the Democratic Party who've called to expel the DSA from the Democratic Coalition. And I want to flip that around. Is the room in the party you want to create from moderate Democrats? Yes. Full stop. Full stop. I'm not interested in expiling people from parties. I think that's what you do when you can't win the debate within the party. Even if they work with APAC? If they are Democrats and they run as Democrats and they win as Democrats and they should be a part of the Democratic Party. And I, you know, I have politics is also the art of making the principled possible. That's what it should be. And there are people with whom I have vehement disagreements with on any number of topics. And if we can find a place of agreement, that's what I'm going to focus that relationship on. If you're just looking for people who you agree with and everything, then you might as well just stay home and look at a mirror. Yeah. I have a big question inspired also by my colleagues interview with Mick Jagger. Wow. I didn't see this like way of calling. Yeah. There you go. It took turn. In that interview, Jagger said, you have to have a big ego to be a rock star. And it made me wonder after having interviewed many politicians, what personality traits you actually think you need to have to be a successful politician because you are considered now to be one of the most successful politicians. Thank you. And especially in an era where politics is pretty brutal. What are the character traits you have? Yeah. What are the character traits that you think you need to have? I think there is some level of absurdity that you have to have as a part of yourself to believe that it should be you. What I think is critically important, especially now, is an honesty, an honesty about what you believe, what you're fighting for, and that you can hold that honesty, especially with people with whom you disagree with. You mean principle? Yes, it's both principled, but even if you have an unprincipled position that you can be honest about it, because I think that what New Yorkers and what Americans are looking for is that they can trust whether or not they like you or agree with you, they can trust what it is that you stand for. And I found that there were a lot of people when I was running for mayor who would name a few things that they disagreed with me on, but they also appreciated that they could rattle off exactly what my campaign was about. I also think you have to be able to explain what it is that what it is that you're doing and why you're doing it. Oftentimes, it seems like the only answer is power, and that's not a good answer. It can't be a good answer. It has to be who are you fighting for and why and how, and I think those are questions that too often trip people up. You know, if I think about you and President Trump, there's, I'm going somewhere here. Me Jagger. Me Jagger, President Trump. No, but if I, these are people who have power or charisma, have been political, successful, President Trump, he has a particular persona that is about sort of vengeance and anger and fighting for his followers, but it has a certain tenor. You're known for smiling a lot, which I can attest to in this interview. And I wonder just about the political philosophy behind that, apart from just the personality trait perhaps you're just a naturally optimistic soul. But there does seem to be both successful models, but different. I wish I could say that I adopted this as part of a political project, but I have to credit more of my parents and my grandparents because it was something that they encouraged as I was a kid was that smiling was, was the way to express yourself. And I think in both of these instances, though, what you're describing is that you are showing something to the world about who you are, what you're for, how it makes you feel. And I think oftentimes it feels like politicians are blank canvases and everyone else is supposed to paint them in. And I think it's time to show people this is who I am. Maybe you don't like it, maybe you do like it, but this is me. And at least we can work off of a shared understanding of who that is. Speaking of you, I want to understand a little bit of the personal side of what it means to be mayor. wife, obviously, Ramadhan. Duaji is only 29, you're only 34, you met on hinge, you got married just last year. This seems like a lot. (laughing) - It is. - Now you're both living in Gracie Mansion. I mean, what has the first year of navigating being newlyweds, being recently married and also this waving hands in the air? - It's a lot. And I wouldn't wanna do it with anyone else. It's to be married to the love of my life while leading the city that I love. I can't really ask for more. And in her I've found someone who is an oasis. And I think it's, I'm just forever thankful for it. - But normally in a first year of marriage you're fighting over who puts the toothbrush in and you're not deciding how you're gonna be married first lady. - I think there's some particular conversations that we have, but in many ways, the beauty of our life is that it still feels as if it is our life. - Do you think the scrutiny she's getting is fair? - No. I think it's, I think this goes back to an earlier part of our conversation, which is what we sign up for. And also what I think in many ways is also an antiquated understanding of what a politician's wife is supposed to be. She is her own person. She's an incredible artist. And yet so much of how she engages with the world today is framed through her being my wife. And some of the most joyous moments I have are when people come up to me and tell me that they love Rama's art. Because that's what she is. She's an artist. Yes, she's my wife, but you know, that's what she does on someone she lives. - Last question. You're presiding over a real vibe shift in New York City. As one New Yorker said to me, it's a little more fun to live here now. The next one, Taylor Swift's wedding, the World Cup, by the way, were you invited to tell her Swift's wedding? - No. - You weren't even invited. - No, I think it's okay. - No, no, it's okay. I know you didn't go, but I wasn't sure if you'd been invited. I mean, you're New York's main hype man now. How do you keep it going after the party's end? - I don't think it has to. I think that living in the city can be something that is fun no matter what's happening around us. And it's also part of a vision of when you fight for working people, it can't just be so that they afford their home and their groceries and their childcare. It also has to go back to the old labor adage of eight hours for rest, eight hours for work, eight hours to do what you will. We have to also make this a place where people can enjoy themselves. And that too has to be something that's affordable. As much as it's important that we are giving 2002 year olds free childcare this fall, it's also important that we have a night coming up where parents can have childcare so that they can go out and celebrate. And that's why it was a real part of my focus in our conversations with FIFA and the host committee that we would secure a thousand tickets for $50 that we would make fan fest, which were previously going to charge money, we would make them free, that we would have 24/7 soccer fields that we would extend the lighting hours at basketball courts. We have to also make this a place where people want to live here because of what they feel like when they do live here. And it's an honor to be someone who gets to share what makes the city so special with the rest of the world. And we say, welcome home. - Mayor Zora and Mamdani, thank you so much for your time. - It's a real pleasure. - Thank you for having me, I apologize for the cough. - Not at all. - Thank you. - Thank you. - That's New York City Mayor Zora and Mamdani. To watch this interview and many others, please subscribe to our YouTube channel at youtube.com/@symboltheinterviewpodcast. This conversation was produced by White Orem. It was edited by John Wu, mixing by Sophia Landman, original music by Rowan Nemisto and Marion Luzano. Photography by Devon Yulkin. The rest of the team is Priya Matthew, Seth Kelly, Paola Newdorf, Joe Bilmunoz, Eddie Costas, a Muirino, Mark Zemel, David Hurr, Kathleen O'Brien, and Brooke Mentors. Our executive producer is Allison Benedict. Next week, we have more New York. David talks with Carl Anthony Townes, also known as Cat of the Victoria's, New York Knicks. - I'm right next to him, I was gonna dunk it in. I was gonna dunk it, I seen OG flying in the sky and I'm like, all right, well, he tries to tip the ball back in and it goes long and it goes off the front, right? I'm gonna dunk it back in. OG made it, it was something special. I'm Lulu Garcia Navarro and this is the interview from The New York Times. (upbeat music)