New York
How Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia Student Activist, Landed in Federal Detention
Crowds of masked student protesters raging against the war in Gaza filled the Columbia University lawns last spring, while counterprotesters and journalists surrounded the tent city that had been erected there.
One man stood out.
He was Mahmoud Khalil, a graduate student in his 20s, older than most of the students around him. Mr. Khalil, a Syrian immigrant of Palestinian descent, quickly emerged as a vocal and measured leader during rallies and sit-ins, doing on-camera interviews with the media in a zip-up sweater.
And he was unmasked. Many other international students wore masks and kept to the background of the protests, for fear of being singled out and losing their visas.
His wife worried. “We’ve talked about the mask thing,” Noor Abdalla, a 28-year-old dentist from the Midwest, said in an interview last week. “He always tells me, ‘What I am doing wrong that I need to be covering my face for?’”
Mr. Khalil was a negotiator on behalf of Columbia University Apartheid Divest, the main coalition of protesting student groups, and one with its own spectrum of attitudes toward violence and dark rhetoric.
His decision to quite literally be the face of a deeply divisive movement would have huge consequences for Mr. Khalil. He was called out by critics by name on social media, and on March 8, seven weeks after the inauguration of Donald Trump, federal agents arrived at his door. He was swiftly taken to a detention center in Louisiana, where he is still being held for what officials have described, without providing details, as leading activities aligned with Hamas, an allegation he has denied.
Mr. Khalil’s friends and family have expressed outrage at his detention and possible deportation. But they also say they are not surprised by his activism in a movement that he was born into, nor his relatively calm presence amid a swarm of noise.
As he moved through the world, Mr. Khalil could often come across as the adult in the room. And to one who had known him as an office mate in an earlier time, his role in front of microphones and wielding a bullhorn came unexpected.
“He’s very sort of mild mannered,” said Andrew Waller, a former colleague who worked with Mr. Khalil in Beirut at the British diplomatic office for Syria. “Seeing him in more of a sort of leadership or spokesperson role, I guess was a surprise.”
Mr. Khalil arrived at Columbia University at the end of a long and winding journey. His Palestinian origin story was written and ended before he was born.
His grandparents were from a village near Tiberias, a city on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee in Palestine before it became part of the state of Israel. They were forced to flee in 1948 during the wars preceding Israel’s establishment, Mr. Khalil has said, settling with other members of their large family in southern Damascus in Syria, in a Palestinian refugee enclave. It was there that Mr. Khalil was born in 1995.
In the early 2010s, he fled the Syrian conflict to Lebanon, where he arrived alone and broke. He worked in construction to make enough money to pursue an education, according to his friend Ahmad Berro, who met Mr. Khalil while the two were studying at Lebanese American University. Mr. Khalil graduated in 2018 with a degree in computer science.
While in Lebanon, Mr. Khalil worked with Jusoor, a Syrian American educational nonprofit. There, in 2016, he met the woman who would become his wife, a U.S. citizen of Syrian descent.
In 2018, he began working on programs related to Syria for the British diplomatic office in Beirut. He eventually oversaw a scholarship program for foreign students to study in Britain. His work was informed by his personal experiences of fleeing Syria and his opposition to the government there, Mr. Waller, his former colleague, said.
After about four years, Mr. Khalil set his sights on the United States and applied to a few graduate schools. He hoped to be accepted at one in particular, Columbia University and its School of International and Public Affairs.
He was accepted and enrolled in January 2023.
He saw it as a huge win, not only for himself, but for his fellow refugees, said Lauren Bohn, a journalist who met Mr. Khalil in Beirut and spent time with him after his admission to Columbia. “He said, ‘This will really help me serve all the others who aren’t going to be able to get this chance.’”
He had been at the university for some nine months when everything changed on Oct. 7, 2023.
A campus in turmoil
Students at Columbia turned out for protests immediately after Hamas’s attacks on Israel. Some were quiet calls for peace, others more raucous. Pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel chants rang through the campus, rattling many Jewish students.
Mr. Khalil was on the front lines with Palestinian activists, bracing for a counterattack from Israel that was imminent. In a video from Oct. 12, five days after the attacks, he is seen atop another person’s shoulders, shouting “Free Palestine!” into a bullhorn.
Months of protests followed. Then, in April 2024, pro-Palestinian students established an encampment at the center of campus. They demanded that the university divest from what they called “all economic and academic stakes in Israel,” including Columbia’s dual-degree partnership with Tel Aviv University.
The rows of tents pitched on Columbia’s iconic, grassy lawns inspired similar protests at universities across the United States. They became a flashpoint after Columbia’s president called the New York City police to campus, leading to the arrests of more than 100 people. As the protests intensified, some Jewish students complained about feeling unsafe. Some heard anti-Zionist chants as threatening to them personally. Those accounts reached Congress, where Republicans derided the protests as antisemitic and Columbia as out of control.
When negotiations began between the protesters and the university, Mr. Khalil emerged as a lead spokesman for the students. The two sides met day and night. A Columbia administrator who negotiated with him described Mr. Khalil as thoughtful, passionate and principled, sometimes to the point of rigidity. He got his back up when he felt he wasn’t being taken seriously. Mr. Khalil was also a face of the protesters for the news media, where he was sharply critical of the university, stepping confidently up to banks of microphones where reporters from CNN, Spectrum News NY1, The Associated Press and The New York Times and elsewhere recorded him confronting the school that had brought him to New York.
“It’s very clear the university does not want to criticize Israel in any way,” Mr. Khalil told a gaggle of journalists gathered near the encampment last spring.
On another occasion, at a discussion sponsored by the coalition of student protesters, he remarked that whether Palestinian resistance was peaceful or armed, “Israel and their propaganda always find something to attack.” He added, “They — we — have tried armed resistance, which is, again, legitimate under international law.” But Israel calls it terrorism, he said.
Those comments were highlighted as justifying terrorism by pro-Israel activists on a webpage about Mr. Khalil that had been compiled by Canary Mission, a group that says it fights hatred of Jews on college campuses and that pro-Palestinian protesters say has doxxed them.
Still, Mr. Khalil repeatedly told friends, as he had his wife, that he saw no reason to wear a mask. What were they going to do to me? he asked.
Once, when the number of tents rose to more than 100, including on a second lawn near the School of Journalism, administrators turned to Mr. Khalil. They made him an offer: Remove about 20 tents, they said, and we’ll ensure that the university’s trustees continue to discuss your demands.
Mr. Khalil countered, agreeing to remove a few less than the administrators wanted, according to one administrator present at those talks, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private university negotiations.
Within minutes, 17 tents vanished and the second lawn was emptied. This response burnished Mr. Khalil’s reputation as a good-faith, if demanding, negotiator.
Other times, he stood fast. Late in the protests, when the university offered concessions and the threat of the police arriving to clear out demonstrators was looming, Mr. Khalil pushed back. We don’t want your concessions. The police? Let them come.
Then they did.
New protests, new president
After a faction of protesters took over Hamilton Hall, a campus building, on April 30, barricading doors and trapping custodians inside, scores of police officers descended on the university. They arrested dozens of pro-Palestinian demonstrators and cleared the hall.
Mr. Khalil was not accused of being in the hall. He had been suspended by the university just before the building takeover, accused of refusing to leave the encampment, along with many other pro-Palestinian activists, and then was quickly reinstated. But there were no more negotiations, and the protests ended for a time.
Columbia slowly ceased being the global flashpoint for campus unrest. Mr. Khalil focused on finishing his courses and looking for work after graduation.
He and Ms. Abdalla married, and he obtained a green card, giving him permanent residency in the United States.
Last summer, the couple learned that they were having a baby. Mr. Khalil was excited, his friends said, getting their apartment ready even as the couple looked ahead toward moving after he earned his degree.
“He did everything, basically,” Ms. Abdalla, now eight months pregnant, said. “He did all the cooking, he did all the cleaning. He did the laundry. He wouldn’t let me touch anything.”
He finished his coursework for his master’s degree from the School of International and Public Affairs in December. But he remained aware of protests still bubbling up at Columbia and at Barnard College, across Broadway.
In January, protesters stormed into a Columbia classroom, and two Barnard students were later expelled that month for their roles that day. It was a flashback to the turmoil of the previous spring. While Mr. Khalil was not present, he was soon drawn back in.
Days later, President Trump, newly inaugurated, issued an executive order promising to combat antisemitism and prosecute or “remove” perpetrators of such views.
The same night, an X account of a Zionist group singled out Mr. Khalil. It accused him, without evidence, of saying that “Zionists don’t deserve to live,” and said that the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency had his home address. “He’s on our deport list,” the post said.
It included a video of Mr. Khalil speaking in a CNN interview, during which he made no such statement. Mr. Khalil has said he had “unequivocally” never spoken those words — another student had, and was expelled.
Mr. Khalil saw himself and other student protesters as victims of doxxing, finding their personal information spread on social media. On Jan. 31, he emailed Columbia administrators asking for protection for international students, such as himself, who he said were facing “severe and pervasive doxxing, discriminatory harassment and very possibly deportation.” A Columbia spokeswoman declined to comment on communications from Mr. Khalil.
Jasmine Sarryeh, a close friend, tried to allay his concerns and told him he would never be deported. Now she feels like she let him down.
“I didn’t think to expect that this would happen,” she said in a recent interview.
‘Suspected Foreign National’
On March 5, in response to the expulsion of the Barnard students in January, protesters dressed in kaffiyehs and wearing masks descended upon the college’s library. It was a Wednesday, and Mr. Khalil turned from his baby preparations and attended as well, maskless again.
It was the beginning of a four-day stretch that would end with Mr. Khalil in federal detention.
Videos on social media depict him at the library holding a megaphone — and, at one point, using it to amplify the Barnard president, who is speaking over a cellphone. When the protesters are asked if they want to speak with the president, Laura Rosenbury, Mr. Khalil gives them an encouraging thumbs up. They respond in unison: “Yes!”
Critics of the protests immediately began posting videos and images of Mr. Khalil on X, calling him out by name.
One post included an image of his face circled in red with the label “Suspected Foreign National.”
Then, Shai Davidai, an Israeli Jew and Columbia professor banned from campus in October after he was accused of harassing employees, reposted that image and tagged another X account. It belonged to Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, who had just posted a threat to deport Hamas supporters.
“Illegally taking over a college in which you are not even enrolled and distributing terrorist propaganda should be a deportable offense, no?” Mr. Davidai wrote.
Separately, Shirion Collective, a group that says it exposes antisemitism, has said that it sent the Department of Homeland Security a legal memorandum advising the “detention and removal” of Mr. Khalil.
Mr. Khalil saw some of the posts online and panicked. He was being singled out for deportation directly to the very official with the power to set that process in motion.
On Friday, March 7, he again wrote to Columbia administrators and described a “vicious, coordinated and dehumanizing doxxing campaign” against him.
“I haven’t been able to sleep, fearing that ICE or a dangerous individual might come to my home,” he wrote.
That fear would be realized the next day.
‘Let’s bring him in.’
Mr. Khalil and his wife were out with friends on Saturday night, March 8. When they returned to their Columbia apartment, a man in plain clothes pushed into the lobby behind them. Ms. Abdalla felt her husband tense.
“He knew something was wrong,” she said.
I’m with the police, the man said. You have to come with us. More officers arrived in the lobby. Ms. Abdalla hurried up to their apartment to get her husband’s green card. She reminded the officers that he was a permanent citizen.
“‘This guy has a green card,’” she heard the officer say on his phone. “And then the guy on the phone with him told him, ‘Let’s bring him in anyway.’”
In a video recording of the arrest, she is heard asking the officers repeatedly to identify themselves and to specify what charges her husband was facing. She rushes after the officers into the street as they ignore her questions.
It remains unclear what exactly Mr. Khalil is believed to have done. He is accused by the White House and others of organizing protests, such as the one in the Barnard library, where participants distributed fliers promoting Hamas. A flier that was shown in online postings from the library said it had been produced by the “Hamas Media Office.” It was titled “Our Narrative” and listed Hamas’s code name for the Oct. 7 attacks, with an image of fighters standing on a tank. It is unclear whether Mr. Khalil knew the fliers were there.
“I can wholeheartedly say that I know that he did not touch those fliers,” said Mr. Khalil’s friend, Maryam Alwan. “But just because he had his face out, people are trying to pin everything on him.”
His lawyers also denied that he had distributed the fliers at Barnard.
Mr. Waller, his former colleague in Lebanon, said the depictions of Mr. Khalil that he had seen in the news media did not line up with the friend he knew.
“The idea that he’s somehow a political extremist or a sympathizer with terrorist groups or whatever just sounds totally outlandish,” he said. “If you know him and you know his character, it just feels like a sort of obvious smear.”
There are circumstances in which permanent residency status in the United States can be revoked — if, for example, the resident is convicted of a crime. But Mr. Khalil has not been accused of any crime. Instead, Secretary Rubio has cited a little-used statute as the rationale for Mr. Khalil’s detention. The law says that the government can initiate deportation proceedings against anyone whose presence in the country is deemed adversarial to the United States’ foreign policy interests.
Mr. Davidai, the professor who tweeted the photo at Secretary Rubio, said in an interview that he believed Mr. Khalil was entitled to due process under the law. But, he added, it does not so much matter whether Mr. Khalil personally handled fliers promoting terrorists, if the group he represented did.
“When you lead an organization, you are accountable for your organization’s actions,” Mr. Davidai said. “When you lead an organization that openly and proudly supports a U.S. designated terrorist organization, you are accountable to the spreading of propaganda.”
Mr. Khalil has said he was never the planner and leader of the pro-Palestinian protests; he has consistently described himself as a spokesman and negotiator for a coalition of student groups.
Resolving this was not the job of the agents who came to his lobby that Saturday night. They handcuffed Mr. Khalil, led him to a car waiting outside and drove him away.
Katherine Rosman, Sharon Otterman, Jonah E. Bromwich and Michael LaForgia contributed reporting. Kirsten Noyes contributed research.
New York
Video: What You Need to Know About New York City’s Ballot Measures
new video loaded: What You Need to Know About New York City’s Ballot Measures
By Emma G. Fitzsimmons, Karen Hanley, Melanie Bencosme, Nikolay Nikolov and James Surdam
November 1, 2025
New York
The N.Y.C. Marathon Celebrity Quiz: Can You Guess the Fast and Famous?
It’s certainly exciting to see an elite runner like Abdi Nageeye or Sheila Chepkirui cruise by on First Avenue during the New York City Marathon. But for many it’s just as exciting to catch a glimpse of someone like Alanis Morissette, or Will Ferrell, posting far slower times.
See if you can recall (or guess) some of the other celebrities who have run the 26 miles and 385 yards on the streets of the five boroughs over the years.
New York
Can Faster Buses Really Be Free?
On a rough day, a bus ride in New York starts like this:
Then there are the traffic jams …
the mistimed stop lights …
the bunched-up buses …
and the cars blocking the bus lane.
Zohran Mamdani has made this grim experience central to his pledge to improve city life. Can his bus plan actually do that?
Some of the slowest buses in America plod through New York, stopping and starting, bunching and idling, at about eight miles per hour on average. Speeds have improved little over the past decade. The least reliable buses seldom show up on time.
Zohran Mamdani has built a strikingly successful mayoral campaign by tapping frustration with this system and marrying it to his broader campaign pledge to make New York more affordable.
“Fast and free buses,” he has promised, the two goals always locked together.
Get rid of fares, in theory, and that should speed things up, ending the backlog of riders lined up at every stop. More bus lanes and better infrastructure could bolster those gains. And making buses free would be a boon, Mr. Mamdani argues, for New Yorkers who have said in surveys that they’ve often struggled to come up with fare money.
“Today in the wealthiest city in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, one in five New Yorkers cannot afford the bus fare,” Mr. Mamdani said, defending his plan in the campaign’s final debate last week. Give people back that money, and more of their time, he suggests, and the economic benefits for the city would outweigh even the cost of a fare-free program he estimates could run $700 million a year.
Critics, and even some transit advocates, warn that his two goals are in tension: Spend such vast sums subsidizing the bus, and there won’t be much left over to improve it, especially at a time when the federal government is undercutting support for transit and the economy is shaky. Under any reasonable estimate, the annual cost to the city of making buses free would be more than transit officials expect to raise this year from congestion pricing, the Manhattan tolling program in the middle of its own political fight.
Whether fast buses and free ones can really go together depends on many questions, some beyond a mayor’s control, including whether Gov. Kathy Hochul would cooperate on higher taxes to raise revenue. Even if Mr. Mamdani were able to eliminate fares, what effect would it really have? And would it be enough to change the slog of riding a bus in the city?
Free and maybe faster
To understand the ambition of Mr. Mamdani’s plan, it’s helpful to first take in the vastness of New York’s bus network. It’s at a whole other scale from the subway system (and from any city currently running free buses):
Mr. Mamdani, who is the front-runner in the Nov. 4 general election, first championed the idea of free buses by pushing for a one-year pilot that made a single route in each borough free for one year starting in September 2023. Expanding the idea citywide would cover 340 routes that carry about 1.5 million paid trips per weekday.
Those rides represent a lot of money that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which runs the bus and subway systems, would no longer be collecting at the fare box. The fare today is $2.90, set to rise to $3 in January (although the actual fare collected per paying rider is more like $1.90, after accounting for free transfers and discounted fare cards). If the city were to pay for this instead, the total cost would depend on ridership numbers.
The M.T.A. says the cost of a free-fare program is probably higher than Mr. Mamdani’s estimate. As the authority cracks down on fare evasion, and ridership and fares increase, it projects that by 2028 the annual bus fare revenue, including paratransit, could exceed $1 billion — much higher than the campaign’s numbers.
About a quarter of bus riders also transfer to the subway. And if they haven’t paid for the first leg of the trip, the M.T.A. fears that more passengers may be inclined to skip the train fare, too.
John J. McCarthy, chief of policy and external relations at the M.T.A., said in a statement that the authority was pleased with the attention that transit has gotten in the mayoral race, but also expressed caution about making the buses free without more study.
“Why is congestion pricing successful? Because we took the time to study its benefits and impacts,” he said about the yearslong review for the toll program. “This proposal would demand the same kind of rigorous analysis.”
Still, the Mamdani campaign says the overall cost is relatively small — less than 1 percent of the city’s annual budget. But for the M.T.A., fare revenue covers about 19 percent of its $4.8 billion bus operating budget.
Mr. Mamdani suggests that the economic benefits of free fares could be twice as large as the costs. That’s hard to evaluate (the figure includes assigning a dollar value to the time you’d save by spending less of it stuck on the bus). His other claim is that eliminating the fare would itself speed up the buses.
That is theoretically true. All those seconds it can take each passenger to root around in a pocket, count out change or fuss with the card reader — at every stop — add up to real delays. And just one rider doing this can be the difference between making and missing a green light.
But New York’s own pilot program illustrates one hitch. Across all five free routes, ridership increased during the pilot by about 30 to 40 percent, mostly driven by existing riders taking more trips. The buses, however, actually slowed, because all those new riders still had to board the bus and request stops, offsetting the time savings from getting rid of fares.
That’s another complication: If ridership rises substantially, you have to add service to keep up with it, or you may not see any speed benefits. And that costs money, too.
Mr. Mamdani cites an estimate that free buses could shave 12 percent off trip times. The number comes from Charles Komanoff, a longtime transit advocate and mathematician whose traffic modeling helped inform congestion pricing. He first tried to assess the impact of free buses in 2007, as part of a study of whether congestion pricing could generate enough revenue to make transit free.
“That idea of free transit — it was visionary, it was lovely, it was beguiling,” Mr. Komanoff recalled recently. Politically at the time, though, “it was completely impractical.”
He put down the idea for nearly two decades. Then last December, he heard Mr. Mamdani, polling at the time in single digits, talk about free buses at a mayoral transit forum.
In April, Mr. Komanoff published a new report that is the closest thing to a white paper for the Mamdani campaign on the topic. His 12 percent time savings relies on some of his 2007-era data (bus riders then dipped a card instead of tapping it). This fall, he reran his analysis again, after riding the B41 bus in Brooklyn with The New York Times to collect new data. He estimates that ending fares could cut 7 percent off a trip on the route, assuming the ridership stays constant. That would still be, he said, “a triumph” — an improvement akin to what drivers have seen inside Manhattan’s congestion zone.
Faster but not free
The B41 bus, connecting the Flatbush commercial corridor to Downtown Brooklyn, is one of the busiest routes in the city. The comptroller’s office gives it a D grade for its poor on-time performance and high rate of “bunching” — when buses arrive too close together and disrupt scheduling. On the route’s slowest stretch, speeds dip below four m.p.h.
Flatbush Avenue is, in short, a prime target for redesign and better bus service — something the New York City Department of Transportation has already begun to work on. And it’s a prominent example of how buses could be made faster without killing the fare box.
We rode the corridor, timed how long it takes riders to board the bus, counted all the intersections, and worked with the transportation planner Annie Weinstock to analyze the route. A trip in the evening rush hour covering the Flatbush portion of the B41 takes 58 minutes on average. But if the bus were traveling the corridor totally unimpeded, it would need only 16 minutes to go from end to end. Everything else is a form of delay: The bus spends more time sitting at red lights, and almost as much time sitting in traffic:
Making the B41 substantially faster would require a series of changes:
Mr. Mamdani has voiced support for infrastructure initiatives like this, although the campaign’s estimated cost for the free-fare program doesn’t include the sizable expenses needed to do such projects in tandem. Transit advocates are also pushing the city to go further, leveraging an array of “bus rapid transit” improvements that would also enable riders to enter from all bus doors and to pay for the bus at sidewalk kiosks, while revamping more intersection signals to prioritize buses.
All-door boarding and off-board payment would logistically have the same effect as free fares, cutting the time it takes passengers to board. We asked Ms. Weinstock, who has studied how to implement faster buses in New York, to estimate how much all of these changes together would speed up the B41.
In an ideal world, all these investments could cut about 40 percent off the time of a B41 trip — far more than doing free fares alone. It certainly helps to speed up the process of boarding riders. But that’s not the thing that helps the most. And there are other ways to get those same savings while still collecting fares.
Of course, free fares are about financial savings for riders as much as time savings. But there are some other, less sweeping ways to do that, too.
About 375,000 low-income riders already pay half-cost fares under the Fair Fares program funded by the city. It subsidizes fares on the bus and subway for households making less than 145 percent of the federal poverty level.
But advocates want to push the threshold up to 200 percent — or even 300 percent, where a family of four earning as much as $96,500 a year would qualify.
“We think it would be much less costly than a totally free system,” said David R. Jones, president of the Community Service Society, which has pushed for Fair Fares. He’s also a member of the M.T.A. board.
Mr. Mamdani supports expanding Fair Fares for the subway, alongside free buses. Doing both would further drive up the total cost of his transit agenda.
Former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, who is polling behind Mr. Mamdani in the mayoral race, has said he would make the subway and buses free for New Yorkers making up to 150 percent of the federal poverty line, or about $48,000 for a family of four.
Free for some, faster for more
The allure of free buses is partly that many of these other interventions are harder. Roads must be ripped up and redesigned. Neighbors will complain. Infrastructure projects take years (the redesign of a roughly one-mile stretch of Flatbush Avenue is scheduled to be done next year). Even scaling up Fair Fares would require the city to do more to reach people who qualify — today only about a third of residents who do are in the program.
But you can declare the bus to be free tomorrow, and it will be free tomorrow. It’s a shortcut to improving an aspect of city life where nearly all other answers are slow and hard.
“It’s a guarantee that your life will be better in a way that you can feel every single day,” said Michelle Wu, the mayor of Boston and someone Mr. Mamdani has often cited.
In Boston, the city pays to offset the fares on three high-ridership bus routes that serve lower-income neighborhoods (ridership is up, travel times about the same). That’s the kind of partial measure Mr. Mamdani could pursue: a larger pilot, a targeted set of routes, perhaps while expanding Fair Fares to aid more riders citywide. Maybe that buys patience for the harder improvements.
His campaign insists that the universality of free fares is the point. It’s what gives working-class riders access to the whole city. It’s what could unlock faster speeds for everyone.
But there’s evidence that New Yorkers might like the spirit of the pitch more than the potential reality of it. A recent New York Times/Siena polling experiment of two groups of likely voters showed 56 percent supported making the buses free, even as 57 percent said the city “should not do this.”
To voters, the value of Mr. Mamdani’s promise may largely be in the signal it sends: that he sees New Yorkers struggling on the bus and wants to make things better with big ideas. And that whether or not he really turns off all the card readers, surely he’ll do something to help your wallet, and to fix the buses.
Brad Lander, the city comptroller and an ally of Mr. Mamdani who also ran for mayor in the primary, suggested “fast and free” has a logic to it that’s not necessarily literal. Yes, you need resources to make the buses faster, he allowed, but you also need political will. And Mr. Mamdani is building it in a way that might not have worked had he promised “fast buses” alone.
“If you had had someone say, ‘Well, what if we make the bus a dollar cheaper than the subway, but also produce 20 interborough bus rapid transit lanes, and do all-door boarding to help everyone!’ — those might have been really good ideas,” Mr. Lander said, poking fun at his own policy-dense campaign.
“But they didn’t sufficiently capture the imagination of New Yorkers.”
-
New York1 week agoVideo: How Mamdani Has Evolved in the Mayoral Race
-
Milwaukee, WI5 days agoLongtime anchor Shannon Sims is leaving Milwaukee’s WTMJ-TV (Channel 4)
-
News5 days agoWith food stamps set to dry up Nov. 1, SNAP recipients say they fear what’s next
-
Alabama7 days agoHow did former Alabama basketball star Mark Sears do in NBA debut with Milwaukee Bucks?
-
Politics1 week agoGrassley releases memo showing DOJ ‘unleashed unchecked government power’ on Trump associates
-
News1 week agoMap: Minor Earthquake Strikes Southern California
-
World1 week agoTrump says all trade talks with Canada are terminated over Reagan ad
-
News1 week agoTrump backs away from sending federal agents to San Francisco | CBC News