In the aftermath of the New York City Democratic primary, much has been written about Zohran Mamdani’s remarkable win across a diverse group of voters — including some Trump voters and many who stayed home in previous elections.
Yes, Mamdani won with a relentless focus on affordability, but he also did it by taking on crime and public safety, an issue long seen as a liability for Democrats.
More than one in three New York City Democratic primary voters ranked crime and public safety as a top priority in this election. Conventional political wisdom tells candidates they need to go “tough on crime” to win. Andrew Cuomo campaigned on a narrative of a city in crisis and his signature proposal was to hire 5,000 more police officers. His aligned Fix the City super PAC spent millions on crime ads, including $5.2 million calling Mamdani the “defund” candidate.
But Cuomo’s “tough-on-crime” gambit failed. He lost by 12 points, while Mamdani used the very issue his opponents weaponized against him to build momentum and trust in the political spectrum. Rather than ignoring the attacks or insisting on his own toughness, Mamdani’s approach to safety built the “big tent” Democrats have been grasping for.
My organization, Vera Action, conducted an exit poll to understand the role of crime and safety in this race. We asked voters to indicate whose platform they favored on the issue: Cuomo’s, Mamdani’s, or Brad Lander’s. When candidates were named, 44% picked Mamdani and 39 % picked Cuomo. Without candidate names attached, 58% picked Mamdani and only 16% picked Cuomo.
Despite crime being Cuomo’s signature campaign issue and Mamdani’s being affordability, Mamdani drew even with the former governor on voter trust in handling crime: Both candidates won 44% percent of voters on the issue, while 12% said they weren’t sure. With Hispanic or Latino/a and Asian Americans and Pacific Islander (AAPI) voters, who shifted to the right in the last presidential election, Mamdani came out ahead of Cuomo on crime — by 9 percentage points with the former and a whopping 40 points with the latter.
Democrats in New York City and beyond should take three big lessons on crime and public safety from Mamdani’s win.
First, he consistently made safety a core component of his campaign for a more affordable and livable New York, recognizing that the cost-of-living crisis is intertwined with voter fears about stability and security. His Department of Community Safety plan emphasized “improving the quality of people’s lives [by] creating economic stability, dignified work, and well-resourced neighborhoods.”
Second, Mamdani was specific about what police should do, instead of focusing solely on the number of police officers and size of the NYPD budget, as Cuomo did. In an interview with Stephen Colbert, Mamdani noted that we have to “let the police do the critical work that they do toward creating public safety,” with a focus on serious crime, faster response times, and better case clearance rates. Recognizing that the police cannot address everything, his Department of Community Safety would send trained outreach teams and social workers to respond to homelessness and mental health crises on our streets and subways.
Third, he directly met the attacks against him. In his Subway Takes appearance, Mamdani said, “No matter how many pieces of literature you get sent, I’m not defunding the police. I’m actually working with the police to create public safety,” and laid out his vision. This strategy worked to call out the “defund” attacks as the political theater that they are. In Vera Action’s exit poll, 83% of respondents said they cared more about candidates’ current platforms than past comments about defunding the police.
Mamdani recognized something that has eluded much of the Democratic political establishment: Voters have evolved beyond “tough-on-crime” rhetoric and policies and want more than tired scare tactics. Mamdani distinguished himself by offering a comprehensive set of solutions to prevent crime, respond to crises, and stop violence.
This is not a fluke. In other research, New Yorkers rank housing, gun safety, and well-lit public spaces ahead of more police in making them feel safer. The results have broader implications beyond New York City. Vera Action’s public opinion research nationally and in bellwether states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Virginia tells the same story.
Mamdani’s opponents have already signaled that more “soft-on-crime” and “defund” attacks are coming in the general election. They would do better to save those millions spent on ads and mailers, and instead invest in the comprehensive safety solutions that voters want.
Alana Sivin is a program director at Vera Action, the 501(c)(4) advocacy partner of the Vera Institute of Justice.
Crime and safety are not abstract talking points. They are measurable realities for 8.5 million New Yorkers. Mayor Adams has not relied on “tough on crime” rhetoric. He has delivered results. Since 2021, shootings are down over 25 percent, murders have continued to decline year over year, and the NYPD has removed more than 13,000 illegal guns from our streets. That is not a slogan, it is progress that saves lives.
Housing and safety are also linked, and Adams has tackled both. In 2023, the city approved nearly 28,000 new housing units, the most in more than a decade, while expanding supportive housing and mental health resources. At the same time, his Subway Safety plan paired police with social workers to move more than 4,500 people experiencing homelessness into shelter or treatment. This is exactly the kind of comprehensive approach that voters say they want.
It is important to note that Mamdani’s platform is long on aspiration but short on proven execution. Since joining the Assembly in 2021, he has passed only three bills out of 20 he sponsored. He co-sponsored the FARE Act, which shifts broker fees to landlords and risks driving up overall rents, and he supported Good Cause Eviction, a measure that would cap annual rent increases for market-rate apartments at about 3 percent or 1.5 times inflation. It would also prevent landlords from reclaiming their units unless they could prove “good cause,” even if they needed the apartment back for family use. Policies like this discourage investment and push mom-and-pop owners out of the market, worsening New York’s affordability crisis.
Leadership in New York requires more than promises. It requires results under pressure. Adams has steered the city through overlapping crises in public safety, housing, and fiscal stability while keeping the focus on growth. The numbers tell the story: crime trending down, housing approvals at record highs, red tape cut for nearly 200,000 small businesses, and zoning reforms through the City of Yes that are unlocking the city’s future.
New Yorkers deserve experienced leadership backed by results, not untested theories that risk our progress.