Mayor Eric Adams’s decision to abandon his campaign for a second term is, in our view, a sad moment for the city. In his mayoralty, Mr. Adams showed himself a friend to all New Yorkers, including — unlike Zohran Mamdani — Zionists, Jews, and rich white people. Mr. Adams began the long trek back from the ruins of Mayor de Blasio. His action today, though, increases chances that New Yorkers will choose a mayor other than Mr. Mamdani.

We understand that there are those who credited the charges of graft handed up against Mayor Adams by the Biden administration. We saw the charges as political from the start — it was hard not to, in the circumstances. By the end of that drama, when he was pardoned, we saw it as leaving us a mayor who understands the unjustness of political prosecutions. And a leader more likely to parry the hard left factions lining up behind Mr. Mamdani.

What a contrast Mr. Adams is with Mr. Mamdani. On October 7, 2023, the mayor stood courageously in defense of Israel. He noted proudly that New York has the “the largest Jewish population in the world outside of Israel.” He declared that New Yorkers “stand side by side with Israel every day — but we do so with extra resolve” in “light of Hamas’ unprovoked terrorist attacks directed at the country and its people.”

Mr. Adams’s exit leaves many New Yorkers with a choice between the former Democratic governor, Andrew Cuomo, and the Republican, Curtis Sliwa. As governor, Mr. Cuomo had shocked us by declaring that pro-life conservatives have “no place” in New York state and by a campaign to destroy the National Rifle Association’s ability to operate in New York. In the primaries Mr. Cuomo was spurned by his own party. Mr. Sliwa has been trailing in the polls.

While Mr. Adams did not throw his support behind another candidate, he did declare in his nearly nine-minute video announcing his departure from the race that “major change is welcome and necessary. But beware of those who claim the answer is to destroy the very system we built together over generations.” This creeping conservatism is a virtue of the Brownsville-native that is healthy contrast  to Mr. Mamdani’s Jacobin gist.

It’s hard to name another erstwhile (or current) Democrat who has done a better job than Mr. Adams of working with President Trump. The two men from the outer boroughs appear to understand one another, especially in respect of crime and immigration. Mr. Adams’s earlier embrace of left-wing positions gave way to a more sensible set of policies informed by Mr. Trump’s unambiguous electoral mandate to secure America’s borders.

While volatility — and legal trouble — marked much of Mr. Admas’s inner circle, his appointment of Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch last year appears to have been inspired. Crime has fallen to near historic lows, though those gains could be swiftly reversed if Mr. Mamdani moves into Gracie Mansion. Much, too, will hang on whether District Attorney Alvin Bragg can be defeated in elections next year.    

It’s too early, in our view, for an endorsement in the mayoral race. It’s not too early, though, to see that one of the problems in the contest has been public financing for the election. Mr. Adams, in dropping out, blamed what he called the Campaign Finance Board’s decision to withhold “millions of dollars” from his campaign, which, he said, undermined his ability “to raise the funds needed for a serious campaign.” Ending public financing altogether is the right move.

Many New Yorkers are frustrated by the roster of candidates from which their next mayor will be chosen. Mr. Adams’s decision to step aside, while it will have come too late for some, at least offers a glimmer of the kind of statesmanship that has been lacking. His withdrawal improves the possibility — still a long shot — that Mr. Mamdani can be defeated. If that somehow comes to pass, Mr. Adams will be owed a vote of thanks.