2025 & 2026 Elections

[Icky Mettle]

Cherry picking. NYC is hardly the best test case for this theory. Along with the other most liberal big cities, it’s a layup for this kind of thing.

But the rest of the country is where elections are being lost, not in liberal big cities.

Exactly. Not to mention, the “establishment” Dem here was someone with lots of baggage who was pushed by his own party to resign from being governor. People are making this out to be much more than it really is on a national level.

And remember just 4 years ago when many thought that Eric Adams being elected was a sign that voters were rejecting progressive policies for more centrist policies?

 

[superrific]

So you mock “pushing back and clarifying” like it’s some pie-in-the-sky fantasy, but what’s your alternative? Let Republicans define our candidates uncontested? Let Fox News frame the narrative while Democrats stay silent?

How much time have you spent in NYC? How much do you know about it? Do you think maybe a twenty something from small town ENC isn't going to have strong insights about the place in America most different from there?

I'm not criticizing you so much as asking for a bit of humility. I don't try to lecture people about Eastern NC (or Western NC for that matter, or even central NC where I've at least lived). I would especially not do that on a board where lots of people are from those areas and perhaps live there now.

I am also skeptical that this race was about Gaza, but how about some deference to the people on the ground there? Why would you take such an oppositional attitude toward people who live in a city that you (in all likelihood) barely understand?

 

[superrific]

But it is a real crack in the conventional wisdom. The idea that “socialist” is still a disqualifying label just took a hit. You don’t have to think this changes everything to acknowledge that.

I mean, it depends on what you mean by "hit" doesn't it? I would say it was more like a gentle tap but sure, we would be silly to deny the data point entirely.

But here's the next crucial part: there is now a LOT of pressure on Mamdami to be good. Progressives were super stoked about De Blasio and that didn't go well because de Blasio sucked as a mayor. But more importantly, you STILL hear the name David Dinkins in NY politics. Well, you did 10 years ago, a generation after he left office.

Dinkins, after all, was NYC's first black mayor. His tenure was widely considered a horrible failure. I can't evaluate that claim as I wasn't there nor have I studied it, but I can tell you that people have not forgotten him. And the memory is not favorable. Remember: after Dinkins, there were two terms for Rudy and three for Bloomberg. Dinkins set his cause back through perceived incompetence.

If Mamdani is a great mayor, it would be helpful. But if he screws up, he will be the new Dinkins. He will set progressive politics back by a lot. So we all better hope he's up to the task. Is this fair, that one bad leftist can poison the brand for a generation whereas centrists can fuck up without their experience smearing other centrists? It is not fair. But it's reality. And that's part of why the "socialist" label is toxic.

 

[Icky Mettle]

Mamdani leans into Democratic Party stereotypes and that will clearly be used as ammunition against the Democrats going in to 2026...and if he actually wins the election - his inexperience will almost certainly yield growing pains at best which will (in addition to some of his more questionable policy proposals and his remarks vis a vis Israel and the Palestinian conflict and what can be broadly interpreted as veiled swipes at Jews) likely have some impact on the 2026 election.

The real problem is that there are very few national Democratic Party leaders with a national media presence. So, when one garners significant national attention - it's under significant scrutiny. Mamdani isn't the type of politician we should want under that type of national scrutiny.

Yep. Republicans absolutely LOVE the idea of him becoming NYC’s mayor. And I’m not saying that because anything is actually wrong with him. But he does check almost every box of how republicans stereotype and caricature democrats to scare a substantial portion of American voters.

 

[wmheel1287]

they can win nationally by doing what Zohran did and will now have to do going into the NYC general - expanding and energizing the Dem voter base with a strong, worker-forward, populist campaign, and then forcing the "Blue No Matter Who" crowd to put their money where their mouth has been and vote for a candidate to their left instead of outing themselves as hypocritical diet conservatives.

Do keep in mind that a significant number of the "Blue No Matter Who" crowd has already been voting for candidates to their left over the past 8 years. That group may be smaller than the potential gains to the left or it may be larger. Nobody really knows. I do know, however, that it will start to get uncomfortable for some folks in the middle who have been solidly blue lately.

 

[Duke Mu]

The question isn’t whether Israel-Palestine played a role. It’s whether that issue alone can explain how a self-identified socialist pulled off a win in the face of $25 million in attack ads, Cuomo’s return, media smears, and elite silence. Spoiler: it can’t.

If it was all just youth and charisma, Democrats would have a much deeper bench. But they don’t. Because charisma without substance doesn’t beat Cuomo.

Just keep moving the goalposts. Anything to avoid acknowledging that Mamdani ran a disciplined campaign with a clear message, rooted in material politics, and built a coalition that grew across the city.

Cumo is a lazy shell of himself. Dems need new populist leadership. Without it, a young socialist wins. I don't think is has much bearing on the party, nationally, except a cry for populist talent. The voters are rejecting the old party norm.

 

[superrific]

Again, nobody said Mamdani’s win is replicable everywhere. What I’ve said, and what you’re tiptoeing toward admitting, is that when voters believe a left candidate can win, they start paying attention. And when they do, the red-baiting doesn’t automatically work. That’s the point. That’s what this race proved.

It wasn’t just that Cuomo was a bad candidate. The institutional machine threw the kitchen sink at Mamdani. And he still won. That’s not a “meh” result. That’s a sign that something has changed.

1. I'm not begrudgingly admitting anything. I volunteered that consideration which I didn't see expressed elsewhere, because I'm intellectually honest and I do my best to be open minded about ideas and evaluate them on their merit. And there's some validity to this idea, in my view. I don't know how much.

2. To the extent that you perceive me as "tiptoeing" it's because I don't extrapolate trends from single data points. No matter how much you want to spin this as a great victory, it was a single primary against an extremely flawed -- maybe one of the most flawed candidates I've seen -- mainstream candidate.

To put it differently: this was a proof of concept. The vast majority of proofs of concept turn out to be nothing. If you want to use this to get some angel funding (to use an analogy), OK but you're very far from going public.

 

[Duke Mu]

Sure, Mamdani will have to govern well. That’s true of any candidate.

Now the argument has shifted: not that the label disqualifies you, but that one misstep in office could discredit the movement.

Yes, the left is held to a higher standard. But that’s not a reason to play small. That’s a reason to get serious about backing strong candidates and fighting for their success.

Because the alternative, retreating from anyone who might draw scrutiny, is how the party ends up with no vision, no energy, and no bench. Mamdani didn’t win by playing it safe. He won by organizing, speaking clearly to people’s needs, and refusing to let the label define him.

Memdani did what Jen O'Malley failed to do, when she ruined Harris and Walz' initially populist campaign. Memdani won through aggressive social media presence, not MSM...and he met the people. O'Malley squashed the rallies, and prevented Kamala from visiting NC and FL earlier when Hurricanes Helene and Milton hit. The Trump campaign was losing steam until Trump used social media and Rogan to spread a firehose of lies about FEMA, campaigns.

 

[HintonJamesHeel]

they can win nationally by doing what Zohran did and will now have to do going into the NYC general - expanding and energizing the Dem voter base with a strong, worker-forward, populist campaign, and then forcing the "Blue No Matter Who" crowd to put their money where their mouth has been and vote for a candidate to their left instead of outing themselves as hypocritical diet conservatives.

They can’t win. Harris lost because of an ad on prisoners getting taxpayer funded surgeries. A socialist who has the positions this guy has (including calling himself a socialist) has no chance. The ads will write themselves.

 

[Duke Mu]

Exactly. That’s my takeaway too, not that the “socialist” label suddenly plays everywhere, but that voters are sick of business as usual. The appetite for populist, working-class politics is real. And right now, a lot of the people meeting that moment happen to call themselves socialists. That’s the signal. Ignore it, and the party keeps drifting. Lean into it, and we might actually build something.

I can't disagree with that premise. Populism as in actually dealing with the reality on the ground that the people are FEELING. Job insecurity, Housing prices that are getting out of reach, especially for the young. Bloated programs that don't need a chain saw (including Medicare, Medicaid, ACA - which all should be one program); they need pruning and restructuring. Also, establishment, CORPORATE Dems seem out of touch...and not a real alternative to the GQP.

 

[superrific]

I’ve never claimed to be an expert on NYC. What I have done is engage with the political implications of a well-documented race that drew national attention and $25 million in attacks. You don’t need to be a Park Slope native to see what that means for messaging strategy.

No, you really do need to be there. We have a poster here saying that he thinks the result was mostly reflective of Gaza/Israel. You've said that was wrong, but on what basis? I suspect that there were a lot of "never Cuomo" voters and that might be a complete explanation of the result. How many? Well, hard to say -- but it's easier to say if you're living there and surrounded by New Yorkers.

I'm not native to NYC. I was born in NC. I spent much of my childhood there. I didn't move to NYC until after grad school, and the city was different than my expectations. Here's one illustrative example: when we were getting ready to move there, I was talking with a NYer who had relocated. He said, "don't bring your shorts, nobody in NYC wears shorts." I figured he was exaggerating, because it just can't be that the rest of the country wears shorts but not in NYC. It was true. You wear shorts to play sports. Otherwise it's long pants. And I internalized that so much that I still don't like to wear shorts outside.

The point isn't that shorts versus long pants is important. It's that there are unknown unknowns: things you don't know about a place, and you have no idea that you don't know them. It would never have occurred to me that shorts are not a thing in New York. It was different in a way that I couldn't foresee. So maybe it's a good idea to have a bit more humility when making pronouncements about a place that is sui generis if you haven't been there. Hell, even if you have lived there your whole life . . .

P.S. I don't know if the "no shorts" thing is still true. But in the 90s and 2000s, it absolutely was.

 

[akillesheel]

They can’t win. Harris lost because of an ad on prisoners getting taxpayer funded surgeries. A socialist who has the positions this guy has (including calling himself a socialist) has no chance. The ads will write themselves.

it's at least as likely that Harris lost due to attack ads about trans people as it is that she lost because her campaign gave up on the "weird" attack and the energy she was generating around change from the status quo in favor of hammering toughness on the border and palling around with Liz Cheney.

 

[superrific]

The same people now downplaying the result would’ve pointed to it as proof that the left can’t win anywhere, even in NYC.

Because this wouldn't be one data point. It would be one more of thousands of data points of successful red baiting. As you say, the conventional wisdom holds that socialists can't win. Well, the conventional wisdom is usually conventional because there's some truth to it. Don't get me wrong: I'm as anti-conventional wisdom as they come. It's one of my core personality traits: I don't just accept statements without understanding the basis. It's just that the evidentiary burden is much higher when challenging the conventional wisdom than agreeing with it.

By the same token, conventional wisdom usually loses veracity over time for that very reason: accepting anything as true without examining the basis is not actually wisdom at all. And the conventional wisdom can slip into falseness on its own momentum, like a glacier gradually sliding down a slope. In 2006, it was conventional wisdom that a black man would not be elected president any time soon. Heh heh. But again, the conventional wisdom has been formed by multitudes of examples. More than one data point is needed to push back.

 

[Calheel]

No, you really do need to be there. We have a poster here saying that he thinks the result was mostly reflective of Gaza/Israel. You've said that was wrong, but on what basis? I suspect that there were a lot of "never Cuomo" voters and that might be a complete explanation of the result. How many? Well, hard to say -- but it's easier to say if you're living there and surrounded by New Yorkers.

I'm not native to NYC. I was born in NC. I spent much of my childhood there. I didn't move to NYC until after grad school, and the city was different than my expectations. Here's one illustrative example: when we were getting ready to move there, I was talking with a NYer who had relocated. He said, "don't bring your shorts, nobody in NYC wears shorts." I figured he was exaggerating, because it just can't be that the rest of the country wears shorts but not in NYC. It was true. You wear shorts to play sports. Otherwise it's long pants. And I internalized that so much that I still don't like to wear shorts outside.

The point isn't that shorts versus long pants is important. It's that there are unknown unknowns: things you don't know about a place, and you have no idea that you don't know them. It would never have occurred to me that shorts are not a thing in New York. It was different in a way that I couldn't foresee. So maybe it's a good idea to have a bit more humility when making pronouncements about a place that is sui generis if you haven't been there. Hell, even if you have lived there your whole life . . .

P.S. I don't know if the "no shorts" thing is still true. But in the 90s and 2000s, it absolutely was.

The "no shorts" thing was the biggest shock to me when I traveled the world in 2003-04. You could be in some of the hottest, most humid places on earth (India, Thailand, Africa) and nobody but tourists and school kids wore shorts.

 

[tallheel95]

The "no shorts" thing was the biggest shock to me when I traveled the world in 2003-04. You could be in some of the hottest, most humid places on earth (India, Thailand, Africa) and nobody but tourists and school kids wore shorts.

My husband lived in an African country for a few years and still to this day hesitates to wear shorts.

 

[superrific]

If local residency is now the new litmus test for commenting on high-profile political races, we’d all better pack it in.

Plenty of people who actually live in NYC, including those who cover politics for a living, have made the same points I’m making. Gaza played a role, sure, but it didn’t decide the race. Mamdani built a movement around housing, transit, care, and economic dignity. That’s why he surged from 1% to winning. And frankly, it’s condescending to assume that only locals are capable of interpreting publicly available data, polling, and political dynamics in a race that drew national attention and commentary.

1. It's not condescending at all. And note that I'm not a NYC resident any more, so I'm not exactly elevating myself here. What I know about NYC is getting pretty stale. I think I will always understand the city, but I won't understand the particulars.

2. I'm not making local residency a litmus test. I'm saying that there are places where residency is more or less important. Where I live now is not particularly special. It's not as nice as Durham/Chapel Hill or what I imagine Charlotte to be (haven't been there in a long, long time) but it's not that different. I don't think I'm particularly more knowledgeable about the political environment here than people who study American politics.

NYC is different. It's just not like the rest of America and if you haven't been there, it's hard to appreciate. For one thing, the "white" people in NY aren't like white people elsewhere in America. That's largely because a fairly high % of the white people are Europeans and have spent little time in America outside of NY. Even a lot of native "white" people who are residents aren't typical of other places. For instance, my barber in Park Slope was Uzbeki. He looked white and identified as white. But he lived in a Uzbeki neighborhood (yes, there's an Uzbeki neighborhood -- there are hundreds of different ethnic enclaves and fissures arise when they collide) and that surely remained an important shaper of his views. He likely had little experience of American racial politics.

One of the more reliable predictors of political leanings is the personality trait 'openness to experience." NYC -- at least parts of it -- is openness to experience realized on Earth. 7th Avenue in Brooklyn is the commercial strip for NYC. When I was there, there was precisely one "American" restaurant: a diner. Within walking distance, there was a Peruvian restaurant, two Thai places, an Indian place, an Asian future, a legit authentic Mexican place, a couple of Italian places where the staff had Italian accidents, and I'm sure a couple that I'm forgetting. Oh, the corner delis were all Korean.

To walk on 7th Avenue is to have a completely different experience than pretty much anywhere in America. As mentioned before, it is racially diverse almost to a comical degree, and everything is international. That's not to say that there aren't racial tensions (there are, especially over education) but it's a different world.

 

[Duke Mu]

Just to be clear - populism doesn't mean pro-Gaza or pro-Hamas or pro-socialism...but an anti-establishment campaign rooted on popular issues that affect real people. You have to connect. Schumer, Cuomo, Jeffries don't connect.

In 2016, both Bernie and Trump (for the billionaires) both conducted anti-establishment, populist campaigns. A lot of BErnie voters crossed over or didn't vote for Hillary, the establishment, corporate candidate.

Biden's return to normalcy/establishment campaign worked during COVID, but was unable to address inflation fast enough. Kamala's only chance to win was a populist campaign against Trump as the crooked establishment candidate. She let O'Malley steer them in the wrong direction.

 

[Duke Mu]

My husband lived in an African country for a few years and still to this day hesitates to wear shorts.

Every insect is trying to kill you in Africa.

 

[nycfan]

 

[Calheel]

a couple of Italian places where the staff had Italian accidents