Rapper-turned-reformer Zohran Mamdani unconventional path to NYC mayoral
SHAH ALAM – He rapped his way through high school, surfed SoundCloud in his twenties and now, Zohran Mamdani, rapper-turned-rent reformer, is one step away from becoming the next Mayor of New York City.
The 33-year-old Democratic socialist and first-generation immigrant has just pulled off a stunning political upset, defeating former Governor and seasoned political heavyweight Andrew Cuomo in the Democratic primary. New York mayoral candidate, State Rep. Zohran Mamdani (D-NY) speaks to supporters during an election night gathering at The Greats of Craft LIC on June 24, 2025 in the Long Island City neighborhood of the Queens borough in New York City. AFP photo
He is now primed to record a historic moment in United States (US) history as the first Muslim immigrant Mayor of New York City, the country's largest city.
A Mayor in the Making, Born in Kampala
Born in Kampala, Uganda, to celebrated filmmaker Mira Nair and Harvard professor Mahmood Mamdani, Zohran was just seven when his family moved to New York.
Despite having a last name that carried prestige in academic and creative circles, Zohran's own path was what many would call unconventional.
Still, for immigrants around the world who resonated with him, his journey was not all that different from theirs.
He grew up navigating immigrant life in Queens, attended the Bronx High School of Science where he lost a student council race after running a campaign entirely in rhyme and eventually earned a degree in Africana Studies from Bowdoin College.
There, he co-founded the campus chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine, planting the seeds of a lifelong activist streak.
He became a US citizen in 2018 and wasted no time diving into grassroots politics.
Just three years later, he won a seat in the New York State Assembly representing Astoria, Queens and the rest, as they say, is political history in the making.
Mr. Cardamom, Your Future Mayor?
Before politics, there was poetry. And beats subjective tastes apply. Mamdani's past life as a rapper under the names "Young Cardamom" and "Mr. Cardamom" has become the internet's favourite subplot in his meteoric rise.
His single '#1 Spice,' created with childhood friend Abdul Car Hussein (a.k.a. HAB), earned a spot on the soundtrack of Disney's Queen of Katwe, a film directed by his own mother.
'Every brown boy lived on SoundCloud at one point,' he joked during a recent appearance on the Kutti Gang comedy show.
'I'm running on a very simple message. It's not about being on SoundCloud, though, respect," he said.
His 2019 music video for the track 'Nani,' a playful ode to his grandmother Praveen Nair (founder of the Salaam Baalak Trust), starred Indian-American legend Madhur Jaffrey and has now surpassed 279,000 views on YouTube.
With lyrics like '85 years gold' and 'best damn Nani that you ever done seen,' Mamdani's creative chops clearly extend beyond policy memos. New York mayoral candidate, State Rep. Zohran Mamdani (D-NY) greets voters with Democratic mayoral candidate Michael Blake on 161st Street on June 24, 2025 in the South Bronx in New York City. AFP photo
Grassroots Gold
Mamdani's campaign has echoed the structure of his past projects: creative, scrappy and built on community support.
His bid for mayor raised over US$7 million, largely from more than 16,000 small donors.
Consider that his net worth, estimated only to be between US$200,000 and US$300,000, stands in stark contrast to the billionaires who typically dominate American politics.
His income largely comes from his US$142,000 salary as an Assemblyman and he also receives annual rap royalties, amounting to approximately US$1,267 per year.
It is not just about the money. Mamdani's message has resonated across New York's working-class, immigrant and progressive communities.
His proposals include free public buses, city-run affordable grocery stores, tripling the production of union-built rent-stabilised housing and a US$10 billion tax hike on the wealthy to fund it all.
"This is a city where one in four of its people are living in poverty, a city where 500,000 kids go to sleep hungry every night.
'Ultimately, it's a city that is in danger of losing that which makes it so special," Mamdani said in a talk with BBC.
Unafraid and Unapologetically Muslim
A sorely missed but undoubtedly needed element in America's often complex and ever-shifting stance on pro-Islamic and anti-Islamic matters is a Muslim voice.
Mamdani, however, wears his faith proudly. It is interesting to note that throughout his campaign and during Ramadan, he broke fast on a subway train with a burrito to highlight food insecurity.
He also frequently visited mosques and released a campaign video entirely in Urdu. Mira Nair, New York mayoral candidate, State Rep. Zohran Mamdani (D-NY) Rama Duwaji and Mahmood Mamdani celebrate on stage during an election night gathering at The Greats of Craft LIC on June 24, 2025 in the Long Island City neighbourhood of the Queens borough in New York City. AFP photo
'We know that to stand in public as a Muslim is also to sacrifice the safety that we can sometimes find in the shadows,' he told a rally this spring.
Despite the overwhelming support from American Muslims and Muslims worldwide, that visibility has undoubtedly painted a large bullseye target on his back.
Throughout his campaign, Mamdani has faced Islamophobic threats and even calls for deportation from Donald Trump-aligned council members—despite being a US citizen.
'Death threats. Islamophobic bigotry. Now a sitting Council member is calling for my deportation. Enough. This is what Trump and his sycophants have wrought. It's an assault on the values of our city and our Constitution,' his response stated.
Trump's Worst Nightmare
If Mamdani is the musical, multicultural antithesis of a billionaire real estate mogul and twice-impeached convicted felon, it is most definitely not by accident.
'I am Donald Trump's worst nightmare as a progressive Muslim immigrant who actually fights for the things that I believe in,' Mamdani declared earlier in his campaign.
Trump, never one to hold back, took to Truth Social with his signature flair for hyperbole and insult and fired back at the soon-to-be youngest New York Mayor in United States history.
'It's finally happened, the Democrats have crossed the line. Zohran Mamdani, a 100 per cent communist lunatic, has just won the Dem Primary and is on his way to becoming Mayor. We've had Radical Lefties before, but this is getting a little ridiculous. He looks TERRIBLE, his voice is grating, he's not very smart,' Trump wrote.
In a separate post, Trump mocked Democratic backers like New York City congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and called US Senator Chuck Schumer 'our Great Palestinian Senator,' accusing him of 'grovelling over Mamdani.'
A Hopeful Future
Whether rapping about turmeric or battling for tenant rights, Mamdani's journey from Kampala to City Hall has never been linear.
It's been poetic, political and sometimes personal. With his grassroots engine, progressive policies and a platform grounded in dignity and diversity, he's not just campaigning for mayor, he's rewriting what leadership can look like in the biggest city in the world.
'Tonight, we made history.
'I will be your Democratic nominee for the mayor of New York City," Mamdani told his supporters.
All that's left is the final chorus when Mr. Cardamom becomes Mayor Mamdani, bringing some poetic justice to New York and America.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
2 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Zahid: Immediate aid for fire victims in Bagan Datuk
KUALA LUMPUR: Immediate assistance will be channelled to all victims of the fire that destroyed 23 houses and premises in Kampung Bagan Pasir Laut, Hutan Melintang, Bagan Datuk, early this morning. Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said he had been informed of the incident, and officers from his office had immediately gone to the ground to meet all the affected families. "God willing, immediate assistance will be channelled, and each victim will be given the attention and support they deserve," he said in a Facebook post today. Zahid, who is also Bagan Datuk member of parliament, expressed his deepest appreciation to all parties involved, especially the fire brigade, security personnel, and volunteers, for their efforts in the rescue and firefighting operations. "The swift action and spirit of togetherness shown are greatly appreciated. My prayers are with all the victims. May they be given strength and fortitude in facing this difficult ordeal," he said. In the 4.30am incident, a total of 23 premises were destroyed, involving 19 Class B and C houses, each estimated to have an area of 92.9 square metres, a non-Muslim house of worship, two eateries, and a retail shop. However, no casualties were reported. The Malaysian Fire and Rescue Department's forensic team is still conducting further investigations to determine the cause of the incident.
The Sun
6 hours ago
- The Sun
US Supreme Court backs Trump in key ruling on injunctions
WASHINGTON: The U.S. Supreme Court on the last day of rulings for its current term gave Donald Trump his latest in a series of victories at the nation's top judicial body, one that may make it easier for him to implement contentious elements of his sweeping agenda as he tests the limits of presidential power. With its six conservative members in the majority and its three liberals dissenting, the court on Friday curbed the ability of judges to impede his policies nationwide, resetting the power balance between the federal judiciary and presidents. The ruling came after the Republican president's administration asked the Supreme Court to narrow the scope of so-called 'universal' injunctions issued by three federal judges that halted nationally the enforcement of his January executive order limiting birthright citizenship. The court's decision has 'systematically weakened judicial oversight and strengthened executive discretion,' said Paul Rosenzweig, an attorney who served in Republican President George W. Bush's administration. Friday's ruling said that judges generally can grant relief only to the individuals or groups who brought a particular lawsuit. The decision did not, however, permit immediate implementation of Trump's directive, instead instructing lower courts to reconsider the scope of the injunctions. The ruling was authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, one of three conservative justices who Trump appointed during his first term in office from 2017-2021. Trump has scored a series of victories at the Supreme Court since returning to office in January. These have included clearing the way for his administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show the harms they could face and ending temporary legal status held by hundreds of thousands of migrants on humanitarian grounds. The court also permitted implementation of Trump's ban on transgender people in the military, let his administration withhold payment to foreign aid groups for work already performed for the government, allowed his firing of two Democratic members of federal labor boards to stand for now, and backed his Department of Government Efficiency in two disputes. 'A BULLY PULPIT' 'President Trump secured the relief he sought in most of his administration's cases,' George Mason University law school professor Robert Luther III said. 'Justice Barrett's opinion is a win for the presidency,' Luther said of the decision on nationwide injunctions. 'It recognizes that the executive branch is a bully pulpit with a wide range of authorities to implement the promises of a campaign platform.' Once again, as with many of the term's major decisions, the three liberal justices found themselves in dissent, a familiar position as the court under the guidance of Chief Justice John Roberts continues to shift American law rightward. The rulings in favor of Trump illustrate that 'the court's three most liberal justices are proving less relevant now than at any earlier point in the Roberts Court with respect to their impact on its jurisprudence,' Luther said. The cases involving Trump administration policies this year came to the court as emergency filings rather than through the normal process, with oral arguments held only in the birthright litigation. And those arguments did not focus on the legality of Trump's action but rather on the actions of the judges who found that it was likely unconstitutional. 'One theme is the court's struggle to keep pace with a faster-moving legal world, especially as the Trump administration tests the outer boundaries of its powers,' Boston College Law School professor Daniel Lyons said. In other cases during the nine-month term, the court sided with a Republican-backed ban in Tennessee on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, endorsed South Carolina's plan to cut off public funding to reproductive healthcare and abortion provider Planned Parenthood, and made it easier to pursue claims alleging workplace 'reverse' discrimination. The court also spared two American gun companies from the Mexican government's lawsuit accusing them of aiding illegal firearms trafficking to drug cartels, and allowed parents to opt elementary school children out of classes when storybooks with LGBT characters are read. 'NOT THE COURT'S ROLE' In several cases involving federal statutes, the message from the justices is that people unhappy with the outcome need to take that up with Congress, according to Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levinson. 'The court is implicitly saying, 'That's Congress' problem to fix, and it's not the court's role to solve those issues,'' Levinson said. This is the second straight year that the court ended its term with a decision handing Trump a major victory. On July 1, 2024, it ruled in favor of Trump in deciding that presidents cannot be prosecuted for official actions taken in office. It marked the first time that the court recognized any form of presidential immunity from prosecution. The Supreme Court's next term begins in October but Trump's administration still has some emergency requests pending that the justices could act upon at any time. It has asked the court to halt a judicial order blocking mass federal job cuts and the restructuring of agencies. It also has asked the justices to rein in the judge handling a case involving deportations to so-called 'third countries.' Recent rulings 'have really shown the court for what it is, which is a deeply conservative court,' Georgia State University law professor Anthony Michael Kreis said. The court's jurisprudence reflects a larger shift in the national discourse, with Republicans feeling they have the political capital to achieve long-sought aims, Kreis said. The court's conservative majority, Kreis said, 'is probably feeling more emboldened to act.'
The Star
10 hours ago
- The Star
Trump victorious again as US Supreme Court wraps up its term
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on the last day of rulings for its current term gave Donald Trump his latest in a series of victories at the nation's top judicial body, one that may make it easier for him to implement contentious elements of his sweeping agenda as he tests the limits of presidential power. With its six conservative members in the majority and its three liberals dissenting, the court on Friday curbed the ability of judges to impede his policies nationwide, resetting the power balance between the federal judiciary and presidents. The ruling came after the Republican president's administration asked the Supreme Court to narrow the scope of so-called "universal" injunctions issued by three federal judges that halted nationally the enforcement of his January executive order limiting birthright citizenship. The court's decision has "systematically weakened judicial oversight and strengthened executive discretion," said Paul Rosenzweig, an attorney who served in Republican President George W. Bush's administration. Friday's ruling said that judges generally can grant relief only to the individuals or groups who brought a particular lawsuit. The decision did not, however, permit immediate implementation of Trump's directive, instead instructing lower courts to reconsider the scope of the injunctions. The ruling was authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, one of three conservative justices who Trump appointed during his first term in office from 2017-2021. Trump has scored a series of victories at the Supreme Court since returning to office in January. These have included clearing the way for his administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show the harms they could face and ending temporary legal status held by hundreds of thousands of migrants on humanitarian grounds. The court also permitted implementation of Trump's ban on transgender people in the military, let his administration withhold payment to foreign aid groups for work already performed for the government, allowed his firing of two Democratic members of federal labor boards to stand for now, and backed his Department of Government Efficiency in two disputes. 'A BULLY PULPIT' "President Trump secured the relief he sought in most of his administration's cases," George Mason University law school professor Robert Luther III said. "Justice Barrett's opinion is a win for the presidency," Luther said of the decision on nationwide injunctions. "It recognizes that the executive branch is a bully pulpit with a wide range of authorities to implement the promises of a campaign platform." Once again, as with many of the term's major decisions, the three liberal justices found themselves in dissent, a familiar position as the court under the guidance of Chief Justice John Roberts continues to shift American law rightward. The rulings in favor of Trump illustrate that "the court's three most liberal justices are proving less relevant now than at any earlier point in the Roberts Court with respect to their impact on its jurisprudence," Luther said. The cases involving Trump administration policies this year came to the court as emergency filings rather than through the normal process, with oral arguments held only in the birthright litigation. And those arguments did not focus on the legality of Trump's action but rather on the actions of the judges who found that it was likely unconstitutional. "One theme is the court's struggle to keep pace with a faster-moving legal world, especially as the Trump administration tests the outer boundaries of its powers," Boston College Law School professor Daniel Lyons said. In other cases during the nine-month term, the court sided with a Republican-backed ban in Tennessee on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, endorsed South Carolina's plan to cut off public funding to reproductive healthcare and abortion provider Planned Parenthood, and made it easier to pursue claims alleging workplace "reverse" discrimination. The court also spared two American gun companies from the Mexican government's lawsuit accusing them of aiding illegal firearms trafficking to drug cartels, and allowed parents to opt elementary school children out of classes when storybooks with LGBT characters are read. 'NOT THE COURT'S ROLE' In several cases involving federal statutes, the message from the justices is that people unhappy with the outcome need to take that up with Congress, according to Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levinson. "The court is implicitly saying, 'That's Congress' problem to fix, and it's not the court's role to solve those issues,'" Levinson said. This is the second straight year that the court ended its term with a decision handing Trump a major victory. On July 1, 2024, it ruled in favor of Trump in deciding that presidents cannot be prosecuted for official actions taken in office. It marked the first time that the court recognized any form of presidential immunity from prosecution. The Supreme Court's next term begins in October but Trump's administration still has some emergency requests pending that the justices could act upon at any time. It has asked the court to halt a judicial order blocking mass federal job cuts and the restructuring of agencies. It also has asked the justices to rein in the judge handling a case involving deportations to so-called "third countries." Recent rulings "have really shown the court for what it is, which is a deeply conservative court," Georgia State University law professor Anthony Michael Kreis said. The court's jurisprudence reflects a larger shift in the national discourse, with Republicans feeling they have the political capital to achieve long-sought aims, Kreis said. The court's conservative majority, Kreis said, "is probably feeling more emboldened to act." (Reporting by Jan Wolfe and Will Dunham, Editing by Rosalba O'Brien)
