Curtis Sliwa Delivers Fiery Opening in Second NYC Mayoral Debate

---

In a passionate and combative appearance, Curtis Sliwa launched the second New York City mayoral debate on Wednesday night with a fiery opening that framed his campaign as a struggle between ordinary New Yorkers and entrenched political elites. The longtime activist, radio host, and founder of the Guardian Angels used his time to draw a sharp line between what he called “the people” and “the insiders,” setting the tone for a debate that quickly turned contentious over issues of public safety, affordability, and political accountability.

A Populist Message Aimed at Energizing Voters

Sliwa’s opening remarks echoed a populist refrain that has run throughout his campaign. “Thank you. It's us versus them, it is us vs the insiders and billionaires, it's us vs Cuomo, it's us vs Zohran,” he said, invoking both former Governor Andrew Cuomo and State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani as symbols of what he described as a political class disconnected from everyday realities.

“This is a campaign not about power,” Sliwa continued. “This is a campaign about you, the people.” His rhetoric struck a defiant note, calling attention to residents who, he argued, have been “pushed aside and silenced” by wealthy interests and political machines.

Sliwa, who has spent more than five decades involved in community advocacy and public safety initiatives, cast himself as an outsider standing up for working-class New Yorkers tired of rising costs and increasing street crime. “But we have something more important,” he said. “We have you, the people. And we're not going to be silenced anymore. We're going to fight.”

Building on a Legacy of Public Activism

For many New Yorkers, Sliwa remains most recognizable as the founder of the Guardian Angels, the volunteer crime-prevention group he started in the late 1970s during one of the city’s most violent eras. Wearing signature red berets and jackets, the Angels patrolled subways and neighborhoods when crime rates soared and confidence in city institutions lagged.

That history remains central to Sliwa’s political identity. In the debate, he reminded the audience of his decades of service and his ongoing presence in communities often overlooked by city hall. “This city that I love, and I'm going to share with you my vision to make New York City safer again, to make NYC more affordable again, where everybody once again can live the American Dream,” he concluded his opening statement.

Safety, Affordability, and Renewal Take Center Stage

Throughout the debate, Sliwa continually returned to the twin themes of public safety and affordability. He criticized what he called “misguided priorities” in recent city budgets and called for reinvestment in local police precincts, neighborhood patrols, and community organizations. Rising crime rates in some boroughs have become a flashpoint for voters, with public frustration growing over both violent incidents and perceptions of disorder in public spaces.

On affordability, Sliwa proposed cutting bureaucratic red tape and reducing what he described as “the hidden taxes” on middle- and lower-income residents. He accused the city’s leadership of “pricing out” working families through excessive property taxes and poorly managed housing programs. His plan included streamlining building permits, expanding rent-to-own initiatives, and reclaiming vacant city-owned lots for affordable housing projects.

“New Yorkers shouldn’t have to work two or three jobs just to stay here,” he said. “We need real housing reform that benefits tenants and homeowners alike—not just the developers with political clout.”

Historical Context: Echoes of Past Mayoral Campaigns

Sliwa’s populist message evokes earlier outsider campaigns in New York’s turbulent political history. Figures such as Ed Koch, Rudy Giuliani, and even former mayors in the 1970s-era fiscal crisis once channeled public resentment toward elites and bureaucratic inefficiency into successful bids for office.

By invoking a hard-edged reform message and street-level authenticity, Sliwa taps into a deep cultural current in city politics—one that rewards candidates who appear unafraid to confront both establishment interests and systemic rot. His approach mirrors broader national trends in American politics, where grassroots anger over economic inequality and rising crime have elevated candidates presenting themselves as champions of “the forgotten.”

Economic Reverberations and the City’s Fiscal Moment

New York City remains at a delicate economic crossroads. Although employment levels have slowly recovered from the pandemic-era lows, key sectors such as hospitality, retail, and office real estate continue to experience volatility. Office occupancy rates, hovering near 55% for much of 2025, have left entire commercial corridors struggling to bounce back.

Sliwa seized on this uncertainty to argue that the current leadership’s policies have failed to rejuvenate the city’s economic base. He blamed bureaucratic hurdles, high taxes, and what he termed “anti-business sentiment” for driving away investment and job opportunities.

“Each time another business leaves for New Jersey, Florida, or Texas, we lose not just revenue—we lose part of our city’s heart,” he said. Sliwa’s plan calls for tax relief for small businesses, incentives for local hiring, and dedicated revitalization funds for boroughs outside Manhattan, particularly Queens and the Bronx, where economic inequality remains stark.

Comparing Regional Recovery Across U.S. Cities

While New York continues to wrestle with affordability and public safety, other major metropolitan areas have faced similar challenges in balancing recovery and reform. Cities such as San Francisco and Chicago have undertaken comparable debates over policing, housing, and urban renewal.

Sliwa cited those comparisons, warning that New York risked “following the same downward cycle” unless leaders shifted focus from “bureaucrats and billionaires” to “the basic needs of the people.” His remarks drew applause from sections of the audience, who cheered his criticism of what he called “a city built for luxury living, not for living.”

Economic analysts note that New York’s situation is unique due to its massive municipal workforce, global financial sector, and status as a cultural capital. However, the tension between growth and livability has become a central narrative not only in this year’s mayoral race but across urban America.

Public Response and Debate Atmosphere

The debate hall buzzed with energy as Sliwa’s remarks opened the evening on a combative note. His populist slogans—interspersed with personal anecdotes drawn from decades of community work—elicited strong reactions from both supporters and critics. Opponents accused him of oversimplifying complex issues, while supporters praised what they described as “unfiltered truth-telling.”

Outside the venue, a small crowd of demonstrators gathered, some carrying Guardian Angels-inspired banners, while others protested his policing proposals. The stark contrast in public sentiment highlighted the city’s ideological fault lines—between those who prioritize law enforcement expansion and those advocating for broader social investments.

The Road Ahead in a Heated Race

As the campaign enters its final stretch, the second debate underscored Sliwa’s determination to position himself as the voice of everyday New Yorkers disillusioned with both major political parties. His emphasis on “the people versus the insiders” encapsulates a broader strategy aimed at cutting through the polarization that has come to define city politics.

If his rhetoric resonated during the debate, its effectiveness at the ballot box remains uncertain. Political analysts note that Sliwa’s grassroot-driven campaign faces formidable institutional and financial headwinds. Yet his message could continue shaping the election narrative by forcing more established candidates to address voter concerns about crime, affordability, and transparency in city governance.

In the end, Sliwa’s fiery opening was more than a sound bite—it was a rallying cry born of decades walking, patrolling, and advocating on New York’s streets. Whether that message is enough to propel him to the mayor’s office will depend on voters’ shared sense of who truly represents “the people” in a city that constantly reinvents itself, for better or worse.