NYC mayoral candidates face off in forum held by PIX11 News
NEW YORK (PIX11) – The top six Democratic candidates for New York City mayor are facing off against one another during a forum airing exclusively on PIX11 News.
Comptroller Brad Lander, former Comptroller Scott Stringer, Council Speaker Adrienne Adams and state Sen. Zellnor Myrie are all vying for the Democratic nomination for November's general election.
More Local News
Polling from Emerson College/PIX11 News/The Hill showed Cuomo maintaining a lead, followed by Mamdani – who's made the biggest dent in Cuomo's popularity. Lander rounded out the top three candidates, according to the poll.
It's the second mayoral primary to use ranked-choice voting. Early voting starts in New York City on June 14.
'Seeking City Hall: The 2025 New York City Democratic Mayoral Forum' is airing on PIX11 News, PIX11.com and PIX11+ smartTV app at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday. To learn how to submit your questions to the forum, click here.
Erin Pflaumer is a digital content producer from Long Island who has covered both local and national news since 2018. She joined PIX11 in 2023. See more of her work here.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
21 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
The gift Trump never meant to give: the spotlight to Democratic adversary Gavin Newsom
SACRAMENTO — President Trump craves attention and will stoop to any depth to grab it — even pour gasoline on a kindling fire in Los Angeles. But this time he unwittingly provided priceless attention for an adversary. Because Trump needlessly deployed National Guard troops and — more ridiculous, a Marine battalion to L.A. — California Gov. Gavin Newsom was granted a prime-time speaking slot on national cable television to respond. 'We honor their service. We honor their bravery,' Newsom said of the troops. 'But we do not want our streets militarized by our own armed forces. Not in L.A. Not in California. Not anywhere … . 'California may be first — but it clearly won't end here. Other states are next. Democracy is next. Democracy is under assault right before our eyes. The moment we've feared has arrived.' I'm not sure the 'democracy is under assault' message has much traction, but keeping armed combat forces off our streets must be a salable pitch. Regardless, governors almost never get national TV time to deliver entire speeches, even as brief as Newsom's. You've practically got to be nominated for president. But the publicity-thirsty sitting president provided the cameras for California's governor. Newsom's strong address probably boosted his stock within the Democrat Party and revived dormant speculation about a 2028 presidential bid. No longer was the Democratic governor playing respectful nice guy and tempering criticism of the Republican president. Now he was standing up to the bully who loves to use California, Newsom and our progressive politics as a punching bag. Trump's red-state supporters love every swipe at this 'left coast' state. Newsom rose to the occasion, using his greatest asset: invaluable communication skills coupled with telegenic looks. He laid out his version of what happened to turn relatively peaceful protests against federal immigration raids into destructive street violence. And it's the correct version by objective accounts. On Saturday, Newsom said, federal immigration agents 'jumped out of an unmarked van' near a Home Depot parking lot and 'began grabbing people. A deliberate targeting of a heavily Latino suburb … . In response, everyday Angelenos' exercised their constitutional right to protest. Police were dispatched to keep the peace and mostly were successful, the governor continued. But then tear gas, rubber bullets and flash-bang grenades were used — by federal agents, Newsom implied. Then Trump deployed 2,000 California National Guard troops 'illegally and for no reason,' the governor asserted. 'This brazen abuse of power by a sitting president inflamed a combustible situation … . Anxiety for families and friends ramped up. Protests started again … . Several dozen lawbreakers became violent and destructive.' Newsom warned: 'That kind of criminal behavior will not be tolerated. Full stop.' And hundreds have been arrested. But he emphasized: 'This situation was winding down and was concentrated in just a few square blocks downtown. But that's not what Donald Trump wanted … . He chose theatrics over public safety.' In Trump's twisted view, if he hadn't sent in the National Guard, 'Los Angeles would be completely obliterated.' Never mind that the violence was confined to a few downtown blocks, a fraction of a city that spreads over 500 square miles. 'We will liberate Los Angeles and make it free and clean again,' the president promised. Veteran Republican strategist Mike Murphy had it right, telling CNN: 'He's lighting the fire as an arsonist, then claiming to be the fireman.' It reminded me of President Lyndon B. Johnson's manufactured Gulf of Tonkin resolution in 1964 that Congress passed, enabling him to vastly escalate U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. Johnson reported a North Vietnamese attack on U.S. destroyers that many experts later concluded never happened. But I think Trump mainly is obsessed with attracting attention. He knows he'll get it by being provocative. Never mind the accuracy of his words or the wisdom of his actions. Sending in the Marines certainly was an eye-opener. So is staging a military parade on his birthday — an abuse of troops for attention, personal glorification and exercise of his own power. He'll say anything provocative without thinking it through: Tariffs one day, suspended the next. He'll boast of sending San Joaquin Valley water to L.A. for fighting fires when it's physically impossible to deliver it. While Trump was playing politics with immigrants and L.A. turmoil, a poll finding was released that should have pleased him. Californians no longer support providing public healthcare for immigrants living here illegally, the independent Public Policy Institute of California reported. Adult state residents were opposed by 58% to 41% in a survey taken before the L.A. trouble erupted. By contrast, a PPIC poll in 2021 found that Californians favored providing state healthcare for undocumented immigrants by 66% to 31%. Polling director Mark Baldassare concluded the public opposition stems mostly from the view that California taxpayers can't afford the costly program — not that they agree with Trump's anti-immigrant demagoguery. In fact, Newson has proposed paring back the state's multibillion-dollar program of providing Medi-Cal coverage for undocumented immigrants because the state budget has been spewing red ink. Given all the rhetoric about the L.A. protests, the statement that particularly impressed me came from freshman Assemblyman Mark Gonzalez (D-Los Angeles), whose downtown district stretches from Koreatown to Chinatown. 'Rocks thrown at officers, CHP cars and Waymo vehicles set on fire, arson on the 101 freeway — have nothing to do with immigration, justice or the values of our communities,' he said in a statement Sunday. 'These are not protesters — they were agitators. Their actions are reckless, dangerous and playing into exactly what Trump wants.' Gonzalez is a liberal former chairman of the L.A. County Democratic Party who stuck to his point: Hoodlums can't be tolerated. And, thanks to Trump, Newsom was able to make a similar point about the president on national TV: His dangerous, self-serving actions can't be tolerated either.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Shocked' and 'sickened' Democrats react with fury to video of Padilla's removal
WASHINGTON (AP) — When videos first rocketed around the Internet Thursday afternoon showing security officers forcibly removing Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla from a press conference with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in California, senators in both parties were already gathered together for a long series of votes. There are strict rules against using cellphones on the Senate floor. But senators immediately shared the video with each other anyway. 'I showed it to as many people as I could,' said Democratic Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester of Delaware. That included Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., who she said seemed 'as shocked as we were.' The videos, which showed officers aggressively pushing Padilla out of Noem's press conference and eventually restraining him on the floor outside the room, shook Senate Democrats to the core. Beaten down politically for months as President Donald Trump has returned to power and ruled Washington with a united Republican Congress, the Democrats' anger exploded as they skipped their traditional Thursday flights home and stayed on the floor to speak out against the incident, calling it the latest and most inflammatory example of what they say is Trump's gradual assault on democracy. The incident came just days after U.S. Rep. LaMonica McIver was indicted on federal charges alleging she assaulted and interfered with immigration officers outside a detention center in New Jersey. 'What was really hard for me to see was that a member of this body was driven to his knees and made to kneel before authorities,' said New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, his raised voice booming through the Senate chamber walls. 'This is a test. This is a crossroads. This is a day in which the character of this body will be defined.' Washington Sen. Patty Murray said it was the closest she had come to tearing up on the floor in her 32 years in the Senate. Maryland Sen. Angela Alsobrooks said she was so angry she was shaking. Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine waved around a pocket Constitution and said the administration is trying to make Padilla and others 'afraid to exercise their rights.' Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said what he saw 'sickened my stomach' and demanded immediate answers 'to what the hell went on.' Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren called for an investigation. 'This is what a dictatorship looks like,' said Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen. 'We have to stand up." Pleading for Republicans to speak out against the incident, New Jersey Sen. Andy Kim said that 'this is not a time to put your finger up in the air and figure out which way the wind is blowing, to try to think through what type of reaction might come from the White House if we speak out against this.' Senate Republicans were mostly silent on the situation. Thune said that he would have a response, 'but I want to know the facts, find out exactly what happened.' Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said she had seen a clip of the video on the Senate floor and it was 'disturbing,' though she said she didn't know the details of what came before it. 'It looks like he's being manhandled and physically removed, and it's hard to imagine a justification for that,' Collins said. Other Republicans were less sympathetic. Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, the No. 2 Republican, raised his voice when asked about the incident and said that Padilla should have been at work in Washington. He said he had not watched the video. 'Was he being disruptive?' asked South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, who also had not seen the video. 'He got what he wanted, he's on video.' Padilla was forcibly removed from the press conference after introducing himself and saying he had questions for Secretary Noem amid immigration raids in his state that have led to protests. Video shows a Secret Service agent on Noem's security detail grabbing the California senator by his jacket and shoving him from the room as he yells, 'Hands off!' Later video shows Padilla on his knees and pushed to the ground with several officers on top of him. In a statement, the Department of Homeland Security said Padilla 'chose disrespectful political theater and interrupted a live news conference.' They defended the officers' conduct and claimed erroneously that Padilla did not identify himself and said Secret Service believed him to be an attacker. The Democrats described Padilla, the son of immigrants from Mexico, as a 'kind and gentle person' and said that disrespect is not a crime in the United States. They also invoked the end of Trump's last presidency, when a mob of his supporters attacked the Capitol and sent them running. 'I have never, ever — other than January 6 — been so outraged at the conduct of an administration,' said Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lawmakers pass tax increases on corporations, highest earners, but governor remains an obstacle
() The Maine Legislature on Thursday passed measures that would raise the tax rate on corporations and alter the state's tax brackets to provide relief for the middle class. Another proposal that specifically sought to raise taxes on millionaires, however, was rejected. All of these were determined by a handful, or in some instances just one, vote. And with such narrow margins, the chambers will be unlikely to overcome a potential veto from Gov. Janet Mills, who has already expressed her opposition. The advance of these tax changes comes amid the Appropriations and Financial Affairs Committee finalizing a budget plan to send to the Maine House of Representatives and Senate for approval, and the potential for increased tax revenue could be consequential. Advocates and some Democratic lawmakers specifically pushed for the Legislature to adjust taxes as a means to continue to fund the health and child care programs that Mills proposed cutting in her budget proposal. So far, only some of those proposals have made it into the committee's budget plan. Notably, the committee rejected Mills' suggested cuts to childcare worker stipends and Head Start. Meanwhile, the committee included some initiatives to save or raise money, such as rolling back funding for mental health programs and pensions, as well as increasing the cigarette excise tax. Both chambers backed LD 229, which would increase the base of the state's tax brackets. It would do this by both increasing the number of tax brackets and by adding a top tax bracket for high income earners. Maine currently has three tax brackets with tax rates of 5.8%, 6.75% and 7.15%. The top tax bracket is currently for any individual making more than $61,600. The bill would add two more brackets for the highest earners, which would be taxed at 7.75% and 8.95%. In the Senate, several critics of the bill said that raising tax rates on the wealthiest individuals would drive investors away. Though tax committee co-chair Sen. Nicole Grohowski (D-Hancock) said the state's tax code is currently 'upside down,' asking more proportionately from earners in the middle than those at the top. 'This bill is here to fix that,' she said. The ideas in this bill are not new, and could lend themselves to a veto, again. Mills' administration testified against the bill during its public hearing, reiterating many of the same concerns the governor had when she vetoed a bill last year that sought to adjust Maine's tax bracelets by adding a new top tax rate of 8.45% and expanding the lower tax brackets. While describing the bill as well intentioned in her veto message, the governor said the bill wouldn't reduce the tax burden for lower-income people because of the state's many exemptions, deductions and credits that more people have become eligible for in recent years. The governor also cited possible state budget challenges if Maine were to increase its reliance on a small number of taxpayers whose income is disproportionately composed of often volatile business. The other bill both chambers backed is LD 1879, which would raise the tax rate on corporations to support the agricultural economy, though the Mills administration is also opposed to this plan. Specifically, it would increase the top marginal corporate income tax rate to 10% on income over $3,500,000 for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2026. This revenue would then be distributed to various funds and programs, such as the dairy stabilization support fund, agricultural marketing loan fund and business recovery and resilience fund, among others. Michael Allen, associate commissioner for tax policy in the Department of Administrative and Financial Services, testified against the bill on behalf of Mills during the public hearing, noting that it would make Maine's top marginal corporate income tax rate among the highest in the country. He also noted a number of technical concerns with the proposal. While both chambers have now passed LD 1879, it took several attempts for them to get on the same page. While the House initially passed this bill 77-67, the Senate failed to pass it with a 13-18 vote and subsequently voted against it without a roll call, returning it to the lower chamber in nonconcurrence. On Wednesday, House Minority Leader Billy Bob Faulkingham (R-Winter Harbor) tried to recede and concur but his motion failed 65-78. The House then insisted on its vote to pass the bill and the Senate tabled it when it was sent back to that body on Wednesday. But on Thursday the Senate changed course, voting 18-16 to recede and concur with the House. Both chambers narrowly rejected what is commonly referred to as a 'millionaire's tax.' The proposal, LD 1089, was amended to a lower surcharge than initially proposed. It would place an income tax surcharge of 2% on the portion of a resident's taxable income beyond $1 million for single filers, $1.5 million for heads of households and $2 million for married people filing jointly. This revenue would then go toward funding public K-12 education. Originally, the bill sought to tax income over $1 million by an additional 4%, which would have mirrored a law recently passed in Massachusetts. The House failed to pass the measure 70-72 on Wednesday before voting against it without a roll call. The Senate ultimately did the same Thursday, after an initial vote to pass it failed 17-18. The Mills administration has also testified against this bill. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
