
Zohran Mamdani has struck a blow to the Democratic party's passivity
We're told that the Democratic party is at a crossroads, that leaders have lost their identity and their way. We're told that they must spend millions discovering their own 'Joe Rogan', or espouse deregulation, or surrender the fight for the rights of targeted minorities. The Democrats, we're told, are in a moment of soul searching, of trying to find out how they lost young men and the white working class. They're still thinking, half a decade on, of how to undo the supposed damage of the 2020 summer, when protesters opposed to the extrajudicial killings of Black civilians shouted: 'Defund the police.' The subtext of this handwringing, which has been incessant in the media and among party insiders since the November election, is that the party must move, yet again, to the right. It is presumed that they can't attract voters otherwise.
The apparent victory (still unofficial because the counting won't technically be complete until July) of a 33-year-old socialist in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary this week suggests otherwise. Zohran Mamdani, a state assemblymember from Queens, was a little-known leftwing activist whose campaign against the former governor and New York household name Andrew Cuomo was polling in the single digits. But with immense personal charisma and a talent for retail politicking, airtight message discipline centered on making life affordable, and a small army of motivated young volunteers, Mamdani defeated a political dynasty, defied conventional wisdom, and is expected to win the American left its biggest electoral victory since Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's primary coup in 2018.
In the process, his campaign presented a new vision of the party: one that has energized voters with its authenticity and moral vision even as major donors and the party establishment have balked. The leaders of the Democratic establishment have long believed that the party's left flank was its greatest liability. Mamdani has proven that it can be an asset.
Any responsible commentator will tell you that Mamdani's success in the New York mayoral primary will be difficult for other progressive candidates to replicate. The city's public campaign-funds matching program allowed the candidate to spend his time in highly visible public engagement with the people of New York – rather than on fundraising efforts among the rich. The ranked-choice voting system – still relatively new – incentivized him and the crowded other field of candidates to form a united front against Cuomo, and allowed Mamdani to capture the crucial endorsement of his fellow candidate Brad Lander, the beloved New York City comptroller.
Mamdani, too, seems to have the kind of personal talent that is rare in any politician: a relaxed and personable demeanor, an uncommon gift for oratory, and a rhetoric of morality and dignity that appears not just plausibly authentic but genuinely inspiring, and is already drawing comparisons to liberal political giants like AOC and the young Barack Obama. Crucially, too, Mamdani is uncommonly disciplined: he avoided attacking the progressive liberals, like Lander and state senator Zellnor Myrie, who were slightly to his right, preferring to unite with them and recruit them into his movement, a gesture of pragmatic generosity that kept the field from turning into a circular firing squad. And he has a gravitas that most of us could not rise to, enduring cynical and often racist smears from Cuomo supporters, who called him antisemitic for his support of human rights for Palestinians with a calm dignity that emphasized his loyalty to all New Yorkers, Jewish or otherwise. All of this – his incentives, his talents – contributed to his victory. None will be easy to recreate in another race.
And yet Mamdani's victory is a signal of a subterranean shift happening in the base of the Democratic party – the younger, more motivated, more active voters who the party leadership relies on but does not quite trust. The Democratic party's leaders – like Nancy Pelosi of California, but prominently including Mamdani's fellow New Yorkers Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries – have largely rolled over in the second Trump administration, failing to use either their procedural power or their public platforms to create leverage against the Maga agenda or advance an alternative vision for the country.
Their passivity and risk aversion has stood in contrast to the mounting energy of their voters, whose anger at Trump's authoritarian ambitions, racist immigration policies and broader rollback of rights has sparked a growing protest movement. Energized liberal voters find that the Democratic politicians they elected to represent them are passive and complacent, even in the face of what they themselves correctly described, in 2024, as the ascent of a fascist movement. The party's rhetoric is not being matched by its actions, and its actions are not matching its voters' passions. Indeed, the party appears most energetic when it is crushing the ambitions of its charismatic younger members, as when it denied powerful committee positions to AOC and Texas's Jasmine Crockett.
Establishment Democrats seem, if anything, as if they want to disappear, to be absolved of their responsibility to advance a political agenda of their own. This might be why they have fled, repeatedly, rightward, away from their own professed principles. This might be why they lined up, during the mayoral primary, behind Cuomo, the disgraced former governor whom many of them had called on to resign just four years ago his candidacy was a promise that their own structures of power and patronage would remain intact, that nothing much would change. Mamdani represented a threat to their own vision of a do-nothing political party. For that, they tried to crush him.
You can only antagonize your own base for so long before they begin to notice. In a new poll conducted just days before Mamdani's upset victory, fully 62% of Democratic voters said that their party needs new leadership. Mamdani – youthful, energetic, and actually interested in governance – offers both a rebuke to the Democratic establishment and a vision of the party's renewal. It may be coming whether the Democratic National Committee likes it or not. Fed up with their useless, antagonist leadership and unwilling to give up on the prospect of progressive change, many members of the Democrats' hated base are certain to follow Mamdani's example, taking risks to challenge unpopular or ineffectual incumbents and entrenched local party machines. Since Bill Clinton's victory in 1992, the Democrats have been trying to reinvent themselves as a more conservative party, assuming that their future lay rightward. They were looking in the wrong direction.
Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Why critics believe Trump's big win in Supreme Court is 'terrifying step towards authoritarianism'
As the president himself said, this was a "giant" of a decision - a significant moment to end a week of whiplash-inducing news. The decision by the US Supreme Court is a big win for President Donald Trump. By a majority of 6-3, the highest court in the land has ruled that federal judges have been overreaching in their authority by blocking or freezing the executive orders issued by the president. Over the last few months, a series of presidential actions by Trump have been blocked by injunctions issued by federal district judges. The federal judges, branded "radical leftist lunatics" by the president, have ruled on numerous individual cases, most involving immigration. They have then applied their rulings as nationwide injunctions - thus blocking the Trump administration's policies. "It was a grave threat to democracy frankly," the president said at a hastily arranged news conference in the White House briefing room. "Instead of merely ruling on the immediate case before them, these judges have attempted to dictate the law for the entire nation," he said. In simple terms, this ruling, from a Supreme Court weighted towards conservative judges, frees up the president to push on with his agenda, less opposed by the courts. "This is such a big day…," the president said. "It gives power back to people that should have it, including Congress, including the presidency, and it only takes bad power away from judges. It takes bad power, sick power and unfair power. "And it's really going to be... a very monumental decision." The country's most senior member of the Democratic Party was to the point with his reaction to the ruling. Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer called it "an unprecedented and terrifying step toward authoritarianism, a grave danger to our democracy, and a predictable move from this extremist MAGA court". In a statement, Schumer wrote: "By weakening the power of district courts to check the presidency, the Court is not defending the Constitution - it's defacing it. "This ruling hands Donald Trump yet another green light in his crusade to unravel the foundations of American democracy." 2:57 Federal power in the US is, constitutionally, split equally between the three branches of government - the executive branch (the presidency), the legislative branch (Congress) and the judiciary (the Supreme Court and other federal courts). They are designed to ensure a separation of power and to ensure that no single branch becomes too powerful. This ruling was prompted by a case brought over an executive order issued by President Trump on his inauguration day to end birthright citizenship - that constitutional right to be an American citizen if born here. A federal judge froze the decision, ruling it to be in defiance of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has deferred its judgement on this particular case, instead ruling more broadly on the powers of the federal judges. The court was divided along ideological lines, with conservatives in the majority and liberals in dissent. 👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈 In her dissent, liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote: "As I understand the concern, in this clash over the respective powers of two coordinate branches of Government, the majority sees a power grab - but not by a presumably lawless Executive choosing to act in a manner that flouts the plain text of the Constitution. "Instead, to the majority, the power-hungry actors are... (wait for it)... the district courts." Another liberal Justice, Sonia Sotomayor, described the majority ruling by her fellow justices as: "Nothing less than an open invitation for the government to bypass the constitution." Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who Trump appointed during his first term, shifting the balance of left-right power in the court, led this particular ruling. Writing for the majority, she said: "When a court concludes that the executive branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too." The focus now for those who deplore this decision will be to apply 'class action' - to file lawsuits on behalf of a large group of people rather than applying a single case to the whole nation. There is no question though that the president and his team will feel significantly emboldened to push through their policy agenda with fewer blocks and barriers. The ruling ends a giddy week for the president. 0:51 Last Saturday he ordered the US military to bomb Iran's nuclear sites. Within two days he had forced both Israel and Iran to a ceasefire. By mid-week he was in The Hague for the NATO summit where the alliance members had agreed to his defence spending demands. At an Oval Office event late on Friday, where he presided over the signing of a peace agreement between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, he also hinted at a possible ceasefire "within a week" in Gaza.


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Who is Zohran Mamdani's wife? How pro-Palestine artist met NYC mayor candidate in very modern way
As socialist Zohran Mamdani stunned the New York City 's mayor's race by winning the Democratic primary this week, his wife became an unexpected overnight star. Mamdani's illustrator wife Rama Duwaji, 27, had been low-key during her husband's social media-driven campaign before joining him on stage when he celebrated victory on Tuesday night. Some critics of the left-wing candidate, 33, had even accused him of 'hiding his wife from NYC' during his bruising primary against former Governor Andrew Cuomo. But Duwaji was all smiles as she marked her husband's victory on stage, and wrote on Instagram that she 'couldn't possibly be prouder' of him as he shocked his establishment opponent. Mamdani, who met his wife on the dating app Hinge, lovingly addressed Duwaji in front of his crowd on Tuesday, saying 'Rama, thank you' as he kissed her hand. The potential future First Lady of the Big Apple says on her Instagram bio that she is 'from Damascus', however a Mamdani campaign spokesperson told the New York Times that she was actually born in Texas. She is best known for her illustrations and animations, many of which are pro-Palestine themed and criticize Israel and the Trump administration. Duwaji's artwork has appeared in numerous galleries including London's Tate Modern, and has been included in news outlets including the New Yorker, the BBC and the Washington Post. As his wife's lack of presence on the campaign trail became a source of ammunition for his opponents, Mamdani took on his critics with an Instagram post of his own. 'If you take a look at Twitter today, or any day for that matter, you know how vicious politics can be,' Mamdani wrote alongside images from their civil ceremony. 'I usually brush it off, whether it's death threats or calls for me to be deported. But it's different when it's about those you love. 'Three months ago, I married the love of my life, Rama, at the City Clerk's office. Now, right-wing trolls are trying to make this race – which should be about you – about her.' He added: 'You can critique my views, but not my family... (Rama) isn't just my wife, she's an incredible artist who deserves to be known on her own terms.' Among Duwaji's recent artworks shared to her Instagram include calls to release previously detained Columbia student and pro-Palestine activist Mahmoud Khalil, who was locked up by the Trump administration for months without being charged with a crime before he was freed last week. In May, she also shared an animation condemning Israel's treatment of civilians in Gaza, which showed a woman holding a bowl that read 'it's not a hunger crisis... it is deliberate starvation.' Duwaji's thrust into the limelight comes as her husband rapidly rose to national prominence with his surprise victory this week. The 33-year-old has faced mounting questions about his experience since he gained traction and ultimately won the Democratic primary, with his only public service work coming as a state assemblyman. In the state assembly, Mamdani promoted few bills, and his legislative record includes co-sponsoring bills requiring prisons to house inmates based on their self-declared gender, preventing law enforcement from asking about a perp's immigration status, and forcing small businesses to make their product packaging eco-friendly. Critics have said a Mamdani win will see the Big Apple slide back into the type of permissive lawlessness that scarred the city during the COVID crisis, but which woke locals and lawmakers scoffed at. When asked by Good Morning America this week about his lack of experience, Mamdani avoided talking about his record and turned the question back on his recent run for mayor. 'The experience that I show in this moment is to be able to meet the crisis that New Yorkers are facing, and deliver them a new kind of city,' he said. 'One that is unencumbered by the old ways.' Mamdani has described himself as 'Trump's worst nightmare', and his far-left policy platform sharply divided the nation as he gained traction in the mayor's race. He says he wants to raise taxes on the top one percent of New York earners - something the mayor does not have the authority to do - and make a number of city services free including childcare and buses. The city assemblyman has also proposed spending $65 million on transgender care, freezing rent on rent-stabilized apartments, and creating city-owned grocery stores. He has also advocated for defunding the city's police department, defended pro- Palestine slogans like 'globalize the intifada' - which critics say is an anti-Semitic call for the destruction of Israel - and said he would arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.


The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
US attacks on Iran redraw calculus of use of force for allies and rivals around globe
For US allies and rivals around the world, Donald Trump's strikes on Iran have redrawn the calculus of the White House's readiness to use force in the kind of direct interventions that the president said he would make a thing of the past under his isolationist 'America First' foreign policy. From Russia and China to Europe and across the global south, the president's decision to launch the largest strategic bombing strike in US history indicates a White House that is ready to employ force abroad – but reluctantly and under the extremely temperamental and unpredictable leadership of the president. 'Trump being able to act and being willing to act when he saw an opportunity will definitely give [Vladimir] Putin pause,' said Fiona Hill, a former Trump national security adviser and one of the principal authors of the UK's strategic defence review. While Trump has pulled back from his earlier warnings about potential regime change in Iran, going from tweeting 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER' to 'NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!' within 72 hours, he has nonetheless reinforced Russian perceptions of the United States as an unpredictable and aggressive rival that will not unilaterally abandon its ability to use force abroad. 'It has some pretty dire warnings for Putin himself about what could happen at a time of weakness,' Hill said. 'It will just convince Putin even more that no matter what the intent of a US president, the capability to destroy is something that has to be taken seriously.' It also shows a shift in the calculus in Washington DC, where hawks – along with Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu – were able to convince Trump that launching a strike on Iran was preferable to pursuing negotiations that had not yet failed. That could have knock-on effects for the war in Ukraine, where Republicans and foreign policy hardliners have grown more vocal about Putin's attacks on cities and the need for a tougher sanctions strategy. Although he hasn't changed his policy on resuming military support to Ukraine, Trump is publicly more exasperated with Putin. When Putin offered Trump to mediate between Israel and Iran, Trump said he responded: 'No, I don't need help with Iran. I need help with you.' In the immediate term, however, the strikes on Iran are unlikely to have an impact on Russia's war in Ukraine. 'I don't see it as having a big impact on the Ukraine war, because although Iran was very helpful at the beginning stages in providing Russia with [Shahed] drones, Russia has now started manufacturing their own version and have actually souped them up,' said Max Boot, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, during a roundtable discussion. More broadly, Trump's attacks could undermine a growing 'axis of resistance' including Russia and China, given the pair's reluctance to come to Iran's aid beyond issuing strong condemnations of the attacks during security discussions under the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) being held in China this week. 'It also shows that Russia is not a very valuable friend, because they're not really lifting a finger to help their allies in Iran and returning all the help that they've received,' Boot added. The strike could also have implications for China, which has escalated military pressure around Taiwan in recent months and has been holding 'dress rehearsals' for a forced reunification despite US support for the island, according to testimony from Adm Samuel Paparo, the commander of US Indo-Pacific Command. Trump had promised a tough line on China, and many of his top advisers are either China hawks or believe that the US military should reposition its forces and focus from Europe and the Middle East to Asia in order to manage China as a 'pacing threat'. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion Yet his previous hesitancy to use US force abroad could have emboldened Beijing to believe that the US would not come to the direct aid of Taiwan if a military conflict would break out – the one wild card in what would otherwise probably be a lopsided conflict between China and Taiwan. Experts cautioned that the stakes were far different, and the conflicts too far removed, to draw direct conclusions about Trump's readiness to intervene if a conflict broke out between China and Taiwan. Trump's administration appears further embroiled in Middle East diplomacy than it wanted and its pivot to focus on China has been delayed as well. And while some close to the military say the strikes have regained credibility lost after some recent setbacks, including the withdrawal from Afghanistan, others have said that it won't send the same message for military planners in Moscow or Beijing. 'We shouldn't conflate willingness to use force in a very low risk situation with deterring other types of conflicts or using force when it's going to be incredibly costly – which is what it would be if we were to come to the defence of Taiwan,' said Dr Stacie Pettyjohn of the Center for a New American Security during an episode of the Defense & Aerospace Air Power podcast. Around the world, US rivals may use the strikes to reinforce the image of the US as an aggressive power that prefers to use force rather than negotiate – a message that may break through with countries already exhausted with a temperamental White House. 'The fact that it all happened so fast, there wasn't much multilateral involvement or chance for diplomacy, I think, is something Russians can point to as an indication of, you know, imperialism to the global south,' said Aslı Aydıntaşbaş, a fellow in the Center on the United States and Europe at Brookings during a conference call. 'But also in their talking points to United States and western allies, they will definitely make a point of highlighting this as something great powers do, and in a way that normalizes Russia's language on its own [conflicts].