Pragmatism: Andrew Cuomo’s Appeal

While some political figures remain relevant because they inspire people, others remain relevant because they bask in controversy. Some of these contentious figures persist because, despite everything, they have left a mark that can’t be ignored. Former New York governor Andrew Cuomo’s reemergence in New York politics isn’t about popularity or forgiveness in the traditional sense; it’s about memory and effectiveness. In a political moment defined by dysfunction and disillusionment, his appeal lies not in who he is but in what he’s done.

In August 2021, Cuomo faced a scandalous report from the New York Attorney General’s office. The report concluded that Cuomo had sexually harassed 11 women, and he abruptly resigned from office shortly after. At that point, it seemed obvious that Cuomo’s political career should have come to a close. A similar situation happened in 2017: Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer forced Senator Al Franken to resign after multiple women accused him of sexual assault. Franken’s political career never recovered, but Cuomo’s career seems to be trending in the opposite direction.

Now, Cuomo is officially running for mayor of New York City. His campaign launched in March, with a 17-minute video declaring the city to be in crisis and presenting himself as the savior. While Cuomo may not be racking up Instagram followers like some of his fellow candidates, he is steadily collecting endorsements from local officials and labor unions—notably 32BJ SEIU, HTC, and 1199SEIU, which are three of the city’s most influential unions, representing hotel, service, and healthcare workers, respectively. These aren’t just symbolic gestures; they reflect an ongoing belief in Cuomo’s ability to lead and, more importantly, to govern despite his previous scandals.

When he was in office, Cuomo governed with a heavy hand and in ways that alienated those around him such as progressives, centralizing power. However, he left behind a record of tangible achievements: marriage equality, gun control, a $15 minimum wage, and infrastructure projects that finally broke ground such as rebuilding LaGuardia Airport. He initiated a COVID response that, at least in its early stages, brought clarity during national chaos. His daily briefings became a kind of civic ritual—methodical, data-driven, and widely watched. These are the things people recall when asked what Cuomo did, and they are the things that form the foundation of his continued appeal.

What sets Cuomo apart isn’t just that he has a list of achievements—it’s that people remember it. It wasn’t always clean or fair, but the bottom line is that Cuomo acted on his words and in times of political paralysis, progress, and action. In an era where most campaigns have been built on aspirational promises, Cuomo’s legacy is supported with evidence. 

Compare this to Governor Kathy Hochul, who succeeded Cuomo and has struggled to push through bold legislation, even with a Democratic supermajority. Her 2023 failure to pass a housing compact aimed at increasing residential development in the suburbs underscored her limited control over the legislature. Meanwhile, Mayor Eric Adams’s administration has been marred by legal controversies. In September 2024, Adams was indicted on federal charges including bribery, fraud, and soliciting illegal foreign campaign donations—related to alleged misconduct involving Turkish officials. Although the case was dismissed in April 2025 amidst allegations of political interference, the controversy significantly impacted his political standing.

New York voters are not especially sentimental. They know that governing the dense state requires more than vision—it requires action, strategy, and a willingness to push things through. From 2011 to 2021, Cuomo did that, often at great political cost and sometimes with troubling personal behavior that wasn’t necessarily a byproduct of his policies. He built bridges—literally—and helped pass legislation that shaped the daily lives of millions of people. That’s not something voters easily forget. However, such behavior defined how he wielded power: abrasively and often arrogantly, but always in motion. Today’s question must be whether those traits disqualify him or simply complicate him. 

Now, the conversation around Cuomo is centered on utility rather than redemption. He may not be the best person for the job—and one could argue he should never see office again—but the growing support for him suggests that voters prioritize a different kind of qualification: proof that someone can do the job. Even though that standard might seem like the bare minimum and imperfect, it has reshaped how people think about leadership in a post-crisis era.

Cuomo’s campaign platform is focused on the simple, necessary changes: building housing, fixing transit, and restoring public trust. His housing plan promises 500,000 new or preserved units over the next decade—two-thirds affordable—through zoning overrides, subsidies, and partnerships with faith-based groups and private developers. Regarding transit, he’s proposed increasing the subway police force by 50 percent, installing high-barrier turnstiles, and appointing a subway safety director. While some may disagree with his methods, the message is clear: less vision, more execution. 

His continued relevance does not erase what happened. The allegations against him are serious, and his departure was necessary—both for the integrity of the office and in the moment. However, necessary doesn’t mean final. The fact that he is still in the picture suggests that political memory is layered. It holds multiple truths at once—who a person was; what they did; and what they might still be capable of.

Cuomo may never regain the public’s full trust. But he doesn’t need to be trusted by everyone; he needs to convince enough people that he can still do the job. And, in a moment when many New Yorkers feel deeply disconnected from a government that promises much but delivers little, his return speaks to something clear and grounded—the idea that leadership, however flawed, still counts when it shows up and can get things done.

This is the uncomfortable truth of Cuomo’s appeal. If you’re someone who wants to feel good about who’s in office—someone who prioritizes idealism, character, and transformation—there are better options. People like Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani offer ambitious housing plans, real moral clarity, and bold visions for New York’s future. And, if that’s the future you want, you should support them—donate, canvass, organize. But if you’re someone who’s tired of watching good ideas die in the legislature and tired of watching City Hall stall on housing, transit, and basic services, then it’s time to ask a harder question: who’s actually going to get things done?

Not who should govern. But who will.

If you want meaningful change—not just in press releases or slogans, but in steel, concrete, and policy—then Cuomo may be your best shot. You don’t have to like him. You don’t have to forget what he did. But if the city is going to move again, someone has to move it. Right now, Cuomo is making the strongest case that he can. That’s Cuomo’s pitch. Not inspiration. Not absolution. Just the memory of action, and a dare: if not him, then who, and how soon? Whoever you believe in, vote like the future of the city depends on it. Because it does. And, if you believe competence is worth something—even when it’s complicated—then Cuomo is on your ballot. You don’t have to forgive him. But you do have to choose.