We’ve discussed your endorsements. I’d like to focus on Darializa Avila Chevalier, who defeated Adriano Espaillat, former head of the Hispanic Caucus and a former undocumented immigrant. She has strong progressive credentials, advocating ICE abolition and support for Medicare for All. Did you privately assure him of support for his re‑election campaign during your mayoral run? I told him that I appreciated his support when he endorsed me after I won the Democratic primary. My promise to New Yorkers is to use every tool at my disposal to advance an affordability agenda. In Darializa, I see a congressional candidate—soon to be a congresswoman—whose platform centers on caring for families rather than waging war. This reflects my commitment to investing in affordable living standards and confronting the dysfunction that has plagued our political system, particularly in foreign policy.
Earlier you asked about political capital, which I believe is meant to be spent to achieve tangible change, not merely discussed theoretically. In Darializa’s district—one of the nation’s poorest congressional districts—I walked alongside her, noting how the federal government allocates billions to the Israeli military while local residents struggle with basic necessities, such as a man emerging from a bodega clutching two packages of Huggies. This stark contrast highlights the disconnect between community priorities and federal policy, creating a chasm that discourages civic engagement if left unaddressed.
The question arises whether your decision not to endorse Espaillat stemmed from his ties to AIPAC, the pro‑Israel lobby, and his longstanding support for Israel. I consider these factors significant. As Congresswoman Ocasio‑Cortez has emphasized, moral clarity is essential in our politics, including foreign policy regarding funding for the Israeli military. In the final weeks of the race, AIPAC invested heavily in efforts to impede Darializa. It is difficult for New Yorkers to understand why their urgent needs receive little attention while billions are allocated to fund civilian casualties abroad.
I seek to understand how you assign weight to the Israeli issue and how that perspective influences your view of other political actors. Left‑wing streamer Hasan Piker asserted: “Anyone who refuses to acknowledge Israel’s genocide will not stand with you or fight for your health care, housing, or any other basic need.” Do you agree? The sentiment I hear from New Yorkers and Americans alike reflects a desire for a new kind of politics that moves beyond the current systemic bankruptcy. It is difficult to reconcile a policy that condemns Gaza and Palestine—a situation not confined to any single party—with the broader needs of our citizens. Too often, many lawmakers privately acknowledge the severity of the situation but remain silent publicly. This gap between belief and speech fuels skepticism and despair among those contemplating political participation.
Should a litmus test for inclusion in my coalition require a politician’s stance on the Gaza war and a public declaration that it constitutes genocide? While I consider this an important consideration, I do not view it as a rigid, one‑size‑fits‑all test. Rather, I expect a clear vision that accurately describes reality and a willingness to champion the interests of working people who have been denied fundamental rights.
