Andrew Cuomo Ad Leans Into Racism With Edited Photo of Zohran Mamdani
The altered image of Mamdani, a New York state representative, appeared next to text on a mailer claiming that Mamdani 'rejects' the police and capitalism. It also claimed that Mamdani 'rejects Israel,' on the basis that the Ugandan-born Democratic Socialist supports a nonviolent Palestinian-led movement known as BDS that advocates for economic sanctions against Israel.
The advert also advertised Mamdani as a candidate who 'rejects Jewish rights,' claiming that he 'refuses to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.' It was developed by Fix The City Inc., a group predominantly paid for by DoorDash, according to the group's website.
'Andrew Cuomo is afraid he'll lose, so his donors want you to fear me,' the assemblyman posted on X Thursday. 'His SuperPAC just sent out a mailer that artificially lengthened and darkened my beard.'
'This is blatant Islamophobia—the kind of racism that explains why MAGA billionaires support his campaign,' he added.
Mamdani's connection to New York City's Jewish community was challenged by a curveball during last week's mayoral debate when he was asked, as a hypothetical mayor of New York City, if he would visit Israel.
'I believe you need not travel to Israel to stand up for Jewish New Yorkers,' Mamdani said. 'That is what I'll be doing as the mayor.'
Why Mamdani would be involved with sensitive foreign affairs as the local leader of New York is unclear, but the debate moderators did not appear privy to their own lack of rationale. Instead, they followed up by questioning Mamdani if he believed Israel had a right to exist.
'I believe Israel has a right to exist,' he said.
'As a Jewish state?' the moderator pressed.
'As a state with equal rights,' Mamdani replied.
Speaking with Fox 5's Good Day New York in the wake of the debate, Mamdani clarified that he is 'not comfortable supporting any state that has a hierarchy of citizenship on the basis of religion or anything else.'
The gross visual attempt to sway the voters of New York appears especially desperate on the heels of Mamdani's surging numbers: A survey published late Wednesday found that—for the first time—Mamdani had actually topped Cuomo's campaign, beating the ex-governor by 35 percent to 31 percent. The survey was conducted by Public Policy Polling for Democrat Justin Brannan's city comptroller campaign.
Cuomo's continued presence in the race nearly defies logic. The former New York governor was forced to resign from his leadership position in 2021 after he was deemed too corrupt for Albany. Four years on, several major political backers, including a lobby of New York City landlords, have forced Cuomo back into the limelight, surging him toward a political comeback to Gracie Mansion despite his lagging popularity.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Sequoia bets on silence
There is a time-honored crisis management strategy, wherein one says nothing and waits for the outrage to pass. For Sequoia Capital, the strategy worked pretty well this week. While partner Shaun Maguire initially weathered criticism over an inflammatory social media post, that initial indignation cooled quickly. Now, some seem to think that Maguire's defiant stance may even be strengthening his position. Business Insider actually called it 'good for deal flow' — controversy as competitive advantage. Sequoia's calculated gamble carries real risk, though. Another provocative post from Maguire that hits the wrong nerve, a shift in political winds, or escalating consequences could quickly transform their unflappable partner from an asset into a liability the firm can no longer afford to ignore. A crisis communications professional who has managed reputation disasters for dozens of major brands tells this editor, 'Firms like Sequoia are bulletproof until they aren't.' What happened Sequoia's hands-off approach was put to the test earlier this week when the storied venture firm found itself in the eye of a storm over Maguire's inflammatory comments about New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani. Maguire called him an 'Islamist' who 'comes from a culture that lies about everything' in a July 4th tweet on X that has since been viewed more than five million times. More than one thousand signatures have poured in since on a petition demanding that Sequoia condemn the remarks, investigate Maguire's conduct, and apologize. There's been a lot of talk about why Sequoia hasn't done this, with many outlets noting that Maguire isn't just any partner. This status owes partly to his friendship with Stripe's co-founder. According to reports, at a 2015 Founders Fund event, Maguire—then a Founders Fund-backed entrepreneur—defended Collison during an argument with Anduril's Palmer Luckey about quantum computing, earning Collison's friendship. The connection proved valuable when Maguire joined Google Ventures in 2016; he helped secure a $20 million Stripe investment during his first week. When Maguire left Google Ventures in 2019, Collison personally recommended him to Sequoia's partners. (Stripe has been in Sequoia's portfolio since 2010, with the firm investing more than $500 million over 15 years.) Maguire also led Sequoia's investment in Bridge, a stablecoin platform that Stripe acquired for $1.1 billion, and is reportedly Sequoia's link to Elon Musk, though this is probably somewhat overstated. Musk and Sequoia's global managing director, Roelof Botha, are both native South Africans and have known each other for more than 25 years, dating back to their time together at the then-nascent PayPal, where Botha was recruited personally by Musk. Despite that long relationship, the two haven't always seen eye to eye. Botha was highly critical of Musk's management style when Musk was CEO of the merged company, where Botha was CFO. Botha once told veteran journalist Ebbe Dommisse, 'I think it would have killed the company if Elon had stayed on as CEO for six more months. The mistakes Elon was making at the time were amplifying the risk of the business.' But Musk was at odds with pretty much that entire crew at the time, and those tensions have long since been resolved. The bigger point here: when you're managing tens of billions of dollars in assets and your firm's reputation rests on backing winners like Google, Stripe, and Nvidia, you don't easily cast aside a rainmaker. Meanwhile, Maguire's behavior suggests he's not backing down. After issuing a 30-minute video on X last weekend in which he apologized for offending so many — saying he was making a point about a political ideology and not one about a religion — he has doubled down with increasingly aggressive posts this week. He has claimed he has 'reverse engineered' his critics' 'command structure' and threatened to 'embarrass' anyone who escalates against him. He added that this is him at '1% throttle' and warned people not to 'fuck w children of the internet.' The silent treatment Sequoia has precedent for its approach to this situation. The firm has historically given its partners space to express themselves publicly, with figures like Doug Leone and Michael Moritz (who left the firm in 2023) representing different political perspectives. But there's a crucial difference between political diversity and inflammatory rhetoric and clearly to some, Maguire's comments extend beyond partisan politics into territory that alienates both political opponents and potential business partners. It's also worth remembering that even for Sequoia, there is a bright line. Michael Goguen, another, earlier rainmaker with the firm, was promptly shown the door when Sequoia learned of a sexual abuse lawsuit filed against him. The situations are hardly comparable; Goguen's issues were legal and personal, not ideological. At the same time, Sequoia has shown it isn't willing to circle the wagons at any cost, not if its reputation is at stake. Presumably, several factors inform Sequoia's do-nothing PR strategy, including how quickly people, faced with a constant flurry of news, move on from a scandal. The firm is also operating in a different political landscape right now in the U.S. Along with Donald Trump's victory and the rollback of DEI initiatives has come new tolerance for controversial speech. What might have been career-ending at an earlier point in time is now weathered more easily. The firm is also likely banking on the fact that while founders want partners who fit the traditional, more genteel VC mold, they want successful ones even more. Startups being courted by multiple top-tier firms might not like or agree with Maguire, but when Sequoia comes calling with its track record and almost bottomless pockets, most founders are going to welcome the firm with open arms. There's also the very real possibility that Sequoia is working on a contingency plan. (Sequoia declined to comment on Maguire's posts when reached by TechCrunch earlier this week.) Still, Sequoia's silence carries risks. Not all the signers have been confirmed, but the petition against Maguire includes the names of some prominent Middle Eastern executives and founders who have attested to signing it, and they represent the kind of diverse, global talent pool that drives innovation. By not addressing the controversy, Sequoia risks being seen as tacitly endorsing Maguire's views. Put another way, though the venture capital world has historically been remarkably forgiving of controversial figures with exceptional deal flow, the firm is gambling with its reputation in an increasingly connected global market where alienating entire regions and communities carries real business consequences. Whether that bet pays off will depend on how long the controversy lingers, how much business it actually costs Sequoia, and whether Maguire can resist the urge to push things past Sequoia's own tolerance threshold. (He has said he doesn't post anything that hasn't been 'excrutiatingly thought out.') History suggests that established financial firms with strong track records tend to outlive their scandals, even serious ones. When Apollo Global Management's Leon Black resigned in 2021 over his $158 million payments to Jeffrey Epstein, the firm's stock barely moved and shareholders seemed largely unfazed. Apollo just continued its aggressive deal-making under new leadership. Similarly, Kleiner Perkins survived Ellen Pao's high-profile gender discrimination lawsuit in 2015. But it took years and essentially an entirely new team for the storied venture firm to regain its footing in Silicon Valley's hierarchy. The lesson here may be that while controversial partners can be endured, the recovery timelines can vary significantly depending on how firms handle the crisis. For now, the crisis communications professional, who asked not to be named, has some advice for Maguire and, by extension, Sequoia. Regarding the video Maguire published in the aftermath of his initial comments, the expert said, 'I did think that apology addressed the ambiguities in [Maguire's] post. But it's a 30-minute video — you have to be really interested to watch this.' If there's a next time, the professional said, Maguire should 'do two videos — one for three minutes' and another, longer video, for anyone who wants to keep watching. Sometimes, the expert added, 'less is more.'
TechCrunch
3 hours ago
- TechCrunch
Sequoia bets on silence
There is a time-honored crisis management strategy, wherein one says nothing and waits for the outrage to pass. For Sequoia Capital, the strategy worked pretty well this week. While partner Shaun Maguire initially weathered criticism over an inflammatory social media post, that initial indignation cooled quickly. Now, some seem to think that Maguire's defiant stance may even be strengthening his position. Business Insider actually called it 'good for deal flow' — controversy as competitive advantage. Sequoia's calculated gamble carries real risk, though. Another provocative post from Maguire that hits the wrong nerve, a shift in political winds, or escalating consequences could quickly transform their unflappable partner from an asset into a liability the firm can no longer afford to ignore. A crisis communications professional who has managed reputation disasters for dozens of major brands tells this editor, 'Firms like Sequoia are bulletproof until they aren't.' What happened Sequoia's hands-off approach was put to the test earlier this week when the storied venture firm found itself in the eye of a storm over Maguire's inflammatory comments about New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani. Maguire called him an 'Islamist' who 'comes from a culture that lies about everything' in a July 4th tweet on X that has since been viewed more than five million times. More than one thousand signatures have poured in since on a petition demanding that Sequoia condemn the remarks, investigate Maguire's conduct, and apologize. There's been a lot of talk about why Sequoia hasn't done this, with many outlets noting that Maguire isn't just any partner. This status owes partly to his friendship with Stripe's co-founder. According to reports, at a 2015 Founders Fund event, Maguire—then a Founders Fund-backed entrepreneur—defended Collison during an argument with Anduril's Palmer Luckey about quantum computing, earning Collison's friendship. The connection proved valuable when Maguire joined Google Ventures in 2016; he helped secure a $20 million Stripe investment during his first week. When Maguire left Google Ventures in 2019, Collison personally recommended him to Sequoia's partners. (Stripe has been in Sequoia's portfolio since 2010, with the firm investing more than $500 million over 15 years.) Maguire also led Sequoia's investment in Bridge, a stablecoin platform that Stripe acquired for $1.1 billion, and is reportedly Sequoia's link to Elon Musk, though this is probably somewhat overstated. Musk and Sequoia's global managing director, Roelof Botha, are both native South Africans and have known each other for more than 25 years, dating back to their time together at the then-nascent PayPal, where Botha was recruited personally by Musk. Despite that long relationship, the two haven't always seen eye to eye. Botha was highly critical of Musk's management style when Musk was CEO of the merged company, where Botha was CFO. Botha once told veteran journalist Ebbe Dommisse, 'I think it would have killed the company if Elon had stayed on as CEO for six more months. The mistakes Elon was making at the time were amplifying the risk of the business.' But Musk was at odds with pretty much that entire crew at the time, and those tensions have long since been resolved. Techcrunch event Save up to $475 on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Save $450 on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Boston, MA | REGISTER NOW The bigger point here: when you're managing tens of billions of dollars in assets and your firm's reputation rests on backing winners like Google, Stripe, and Nvidia, you don't easily cast aside a rainmaker. Meanwhile, Maguire's behavior suggests he's not backing down. After issuing a 30-minute video on X last weekend in which he apologized for offending so many — saying he was making a point about a political ideology and not one about a religion — he has doubled down with increasingly aggressive posts this week. He has claimed he has 'reverse engineered' his critics' 'command structure' and threatened to 'embarrass' anyone who escalates against him. He added that this is him at '1% throttle' and warned people not to 'fuck w children of the internet.' The silent treatment Sequoia has precedent for its approach to this situation. The firm has historically given its partners space to express themselves publicly, with figures like Doug Leone and Michael Moritz (who left the firm in 2023) representing different political perspectives. But there's a crucial difference between political diversity and inflammatory rhetoric and clearly to some, Maguire's comments extend beyond partisan politics into territory that alienates both political opponents and potential business partners. It's also worth remembering that even for Sequoia, there is a bright line. Michael Goguen, another, earlier rainmaker with the firm, was promptly shown the door when Sequoia learned of a sexual abuse lawsuit filed against him. The situations are hardly comparable; Goguen's issues were legal and personal, not ideological. At the same time, Sequoia has shown it isn't willing to circle the wagons at any cost, not if its reputation is at stake. Presumably, several factors inform Sequoia's do-nothing PR strategy, including how quickly people, faced with a constant flurry of news, move on from a scandal. The firm is also operating in a different political landscape right now in the U.S. Along with Donald Trump's victory and the rollback of DEI initiatives has come new tolerance for controversial speech. What might have been career-ending at an earlier point in time is now weathered more easily. The firm is also likely banking on the fact that while founders want partners who fit the traditional, more genteel VC mold, they want successful ones even more. Startups being courted by multiple top-tier firms might not like or agree with Maguire, but when Sequoia comes calling with its track record and almost bottomless pockets, most founders are going to welcome the firm with open arms. There's also the very real possibility that Sequoia is working on a contingency plan. (Sequoia declined to comment on Maguire's posts when reached by TechCrunch earlier this week.) Still, Sequoia's silence carries risks. Not all the signers have been confirmed, but the petition against Maguire includes the names of some prominent Middle Eastern executives and founders who have attested to signing it, and they represent the kind of diverse, global talent pool that drives innovation. By not addressing the controversy, Sequoia risks being seen as tacitly endorsing Maguire's views. Put another way, though the venture capital world has historically been remarkably forgiving of controversial figures with exceptional deal flow, the firm is gambling with its reputation in an increasingly connected global market where alienating entire regions and communities carries real business consequences. Whether that bet pays off will depend on how long the controversy lingers, how much business it actually costs Sequoia, and whether Maguire can resist the urge to push things past Sequoia's own tolerance threshold. (He has said he doesn't post anything that hasn't been 'excrutiatingly thought out.') History suggests that established financial firms with strong track records tend to outlive their scandals, even serious ones. When Apollo Global Management's Leon Black resigned in 2021 over his $158 million payments to Jeffrey Epstein, the firm's stock barely moved and shareholders seemed largely unfazed. Apollo just continued its aggressive deal-making under new leadership. Similarly, Kleiner Perkins survived Ellen Pao's high-profile gender discrimination lawsuit in 2015. But it took years and essentially an entirely new team for the storied venture firm to regain its footing in Silicon Valley's hierarchy. The lesson here may be that while controversial partners can be endured, the recovery timelines can vary significantly depending on how firms handle the crisis. For now, the crisis communications professional, who asked not to be named, has some advice for Maguire and, by extension, Sequoia. Regarding the video Maguire published in the aftermath of his initial comments, the expert said, 'I did think that apology addressed the ambiguities in [Maguire's] post. But it's a 30-minute video — you have to be really interested to watch this.' If there's a next time, the professional said, Maguire should 'do two videos — one for three minutes' and another, longer video, for anyone who wants to keep watching. Sometimes, the expert added, 'less is more.'
Axios
6 hours ago
- Axios
Palestinian American killed in Israeli settler attack in West Bank
Two Palestinians, one of them an American citizen, were killed on Friday when Israeli settlers attacked the village of Sinjil in the occupied West Bank, the Palestinian Authority's ministry of health said. The big picture: It's the first time a Palestinian American was killed in the West Bank since President Trump assumed office in January. On his first day in office, Trump lifted sanctions imposed by the Biden administration on settlers involved in attacks on Palestinian civilians in the West Bank. Such attacks have been on the rise in the West Bank since the war in Gaza began in 2023. A State Department official said: "We are aware of reports of the death of a U.S. citizen in the West Bank." Driving the news: Florida-born Saif al-Din Kamel Abdul Karim Musallat, 23, was assaulted and beaten to death, according to the Palestinian Authority statement. A second Palestinian was shot during the settlers' attack. He was missing for hours and his body was eventually found dead. Palestinian sources said the attack happened after Palestinians from Sinjil tried reaching their private land near a settler outpost. The other side: The Israel Defense Forces claimed in a statement that "terrorists" threw stones at Israeli civilians near Sinjil, resulting in two Israeli civilians being lightly injured. "Shortly afterward, a violent confrontation developed in the area between Palestinians and Israeli civilians, which included the vandalism of Palestinian property, arson, physical clashes, and stone-throwing (against the Palestinian civilians)," the IDF said. The IDF said it was aware of "claims" that a Palestinian was killed and several others wounded, and said police were investigating. State of play: The Trump administration has paid close to zero attention to the escalating situation in the West Bank. Secretary of State Rubio has taken steps to decrease the authority of the U.S. security coordinator in the West Bank and eliminated the direct reporting channel the Palestinian Affairs unit at the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem had to the State Department in Washington. The White House and the State Department have refrained from expressing any criticism about Israeli policies in the West Bank.
