Althouse: "It felt like the New York Times didn’t understand New York City. It was this strangely conservative law-and-order, traditionalist view..."

June 19, 2025

"It felt like the New York Times didn’t understand New York City. It was this strangely conservative law-and-order, traditionalist view..."

".. that totally missed the reality of the city today. My view is people are hurting and affordability is the issue and the Times just does not understand what everyday people are going through. They’ve disconnected from New York City more and more with every passing year. Obviously, they decided they didn’t care enough about New York City to make an editorial endorsement and then they show up with this wimpy, disingenuous editorial basically justifying why people should vote for someone corrupt in Andrew Cuomo, and not even recognizing that other new leaders had worthy ideas. I mean, the whole thing was like, 'Let’s invalidate new young leaders,' right? It was unbelievably ageist and out of touch."

Said Bill de Blasio, quoted in "Bill de Blasio on Andrew Cuomo and That Nasty Times Op-Ed/The former mayor has a few things to get off his chest" (NY Magazine).

26 comments:

Sebastian said...: "other new leaders had worthy ideas" Sure, if you consider socialism and globalizing the intifada "worthy."; 6/19/25, 1:33 PM
n.n said...: The liberal Ouroboros progression. #MeToo; 6/19/25, 1:38 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: The amazing thing about De Blase and other Leftists is this. They don't believe in enforcing the law. Unless its "hate crimes". But murder, theft, rape, etc? Nope. - its only "law and order" types that want to punish crooks. Y'know the "Law and order types". And immigration laws? well those are immoral. And don't have to be enforced at all.

And then they'll blather about "affordability". As if you cant help 1 million illegals to NYC and not have a shortage of housing. Or as if any of their solutions will fix the problem. De Blase was in power for years. So was Dinkins. What did they do about "Affordability"? Nothing!; 6/19/25, 1:39 PM
Biff said...: Even for Bill de Blasio, that is a remarkably out-of-touch statement.; 6/19/25, 1:40 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: Biden blathered on the campaign trail about "Helping the working class" and those "Evil Republicans that only care about the Rich". So what did he do for working class people? Or the middle class? Nothing! He broke the RR workers strike. He imported 20 million illegals. And otherwise? Zero.; 6/19/25, 1:41 PM
BarrySanders20 said...: At least they agree that somebody is out of touch.; 6/19/25, 1:42 PM
Original Mike said...: "My view is people are hurting and affordability is the issue "

People don't dispute your view. They dispute your remedies.; 6/19/25, 1:43 PM
boatbuilder said...: This ought to be fun to watch.
As long as you don't live anywhere near NYC.; 6/19/25, 1:49 PM
Jamie said...: Has anyone read Ezra Klein's Abundance yet? I'm curious how well it comports with either side here; 6/19/25, 1:53 PM
Keith said...: RCOCEAN II said...

Biden blathered on the campaign trail about "Helping the working class" and those "Evil Republicans that only care about the Rich". So what did he do for working class people? Or the middle class? Nothing! He broke the RR workers strike. He imported 20 million illegals. And otherwise? Zero.
6/19/25, 1:41 PM

Well, build back better injected a trillion dollars (?) into the economy just as it was coming out of the government covid shutdown and as expected inflation shot through the roof, really hurting blue collar workers' purchasing ability. So there's that. Inflation that hurt the non-wealthy bad.

I don't understand you RC. You are so rational about everything. Like you understand basic economics etc. I don't understand why you hate Jews. I agree with almost everything you say about everything else but so often it ends "and it's the Jews' fault." I don't get you.; 6/19/25, 2:01 PM
narciso said...: I dubbed him mayor Bane, after the Villain in Dark Knight Rises,
he tore the social contract apart, and only now are we stitching it back together,; 6/19/25, 2:05 PM
narciso said...: and mamdani, might tear back again,
too bad an army of groundhogs haven't gotten their revenge,; 6/19/25, 2:10 PM
Lance said...: "They’ve disconnected from New York City more and more with every passing year."

And yet they're making money. So they must be giving the paying customers what they want.; 6/19/25, 2:10 PM
Quaestor said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/19/25, 2:16 PM
Quaestor said...: Affordability is the issue, but Bill (I almost type Bull) Duhblahzee-oh's brain cannot contain the solution without exploding.

The reason housing is unaffordable in NYC is the fact that the costs of building and operating rental property are so exorbitant that the only way to make enough money to pay to service the loans required to even put a toe in the waters of commercial real estate, let alone make enough money for oneself, is to build and operate elite properties for an elite customer base. This is why Donald Trump is a billionaire.

Tax the rich! is the moron's mantra, and NYC politics has been playing that game for a long, long time. Long enough for intelligent people to game the system right back at itself. The consumer ALWAYS pays the bills, if not there will shortly be nothing for the consumer to consume. Nevertheless, morons believe people like Warren Wilhelm Junior when they say, tax the rich. That swindle works in New York City because the non-morons live elsewhere.

Affordable housing could be abundant in NYC, but that would mean radical reduction in taxes, regulatory fees, and the freedom to use out-of-state non-union contractors without encumbrances. But that would require the city and county governments to live within reasonable means rather than being stuffed to bursting with people making six-figure incomes without any tangible output, and that is TNT to De Blasio's brain.; 6/19/25, 2:18 PM
Gerda Sprinchorn said...: affordability is the issue

This is economically illiterate.

Vacancy rates are very low in NYC, so almost all housing units are occupied by people who are, in real life, able to afford their units. Those who feel they cannot afford their current unit are free to move to a cheaper unit, move out of the city, or get a roommate.

If there were, in fact, a large number of unaffordable units, there would be many unoccupied units and a high vacancy rate. But we don't see that.; 6/19/25, 2:38 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: Its amazing how many losertarians and conservatives don't understand the "Free market". People and companies charge what the market will bear. If they can get $3000/month for their apartments, they will charge it. Whether their costs are $2000/month or $1000/month.

Further, NYC apartment prices are driven by supply and demand. You can only have so many apartments and so many people in Manhatten or Brooklyn. They aren't making any more land. And people who already live there aren't going to accept more buildings. When it comes to NYC real estate, the only way you can make more "Affordable" is to stop importing more people, and institute socialism. Let the City buy out these apartment owners and then set the rents at a reasonable price.; 6/19/25, 2:39 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: BTW, I don't see what's so "Free Market" about rich people charging what the market will bear for apartments. They're just monopolists.; 6/19/25, 2:40 PM
RMc said...: Ol' Bill is just *now* realizing the NYT is out of touch...?; 6/19/25, 2:42 PM
Gospace said...: All the people before making arguments that NYC apartment prices are driven by supply and demand- wrong. In New York City, approximately 1% of apartments are subject to rent control. This is a smaller number compared to the number of apartments under rent stabilization, which is around 44%. Rent stabilization- rent control by other words. And then there's eviction- lack thereof. Trying to get a tenant evicted for any reason anywhere in NY- not just NYC- is a nightmare, often a years long nightmare. And then there squatting laws. Not anti-squatting- pro-squatting.

Give NY and NYC landlords the property rights they're entitled to under the US Constitution- and apartments would be readily available and affordable within a few years as the market shakes out. Eviction for non-payment of rent, beginning to end, should be no longer then a 2 month process. Anywhere. Not the landlord's problem if you were fired for showing up drunk to work or failing a surprise whiz quiz. And if your 5 kids and spouse get dumped out on the street with you? Not the landlord's problem either.; 6/19/25, 2:56 PM
Hassayamper said...: If Wall Street ever decamps, New York will become the North American equivalent of Harare.; 6/19/25, 3:02 PM
Prof. M. Drout said...: Warren Wilhelm Jr is just additional evidence for my "politicians who use fake names are crap people" thesis. See also Romney, Willard.; 6/19/25, 4:46 PM
Lazarus said...: Wasn't di Blasio the worst NYC mayor since Lindsay? Maybe the worst mayor ever -- very much including the ones who ended up in prison?

It sounds like he wants to play Biden's game -- driving prices and inflation higher with "inflation reduction" laws.; 6/19/25, 5:28 PM
Howard said...: NYTimes is Right wing to the far left.; 6/19/25, 5:47 PM
Howard said...: Progressiveness directly proportional to regressive economic outcomes. Even Ezra Klein can see that.; 6/19/25, 5:51 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: Rents have gone up over 100 percent in NYC in the last 15 years. I don't feel sorry for the "Poor Rich people" who own apartment buildings and *Gasp* just cant raise rents by whatever amount or evict people for any reason.

That's why I hate all his losertarian bullshit about "Why the free market is best for everyone", because when you push them far enough its just "Hey I'm rich and I want to get richer". Or they're just plain stupid.; 6/19/25, 6:26 PM