Donald Trump Warns NY Mayor Candidate Zohran Mamdani: 'Do the Right Thing'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
President Donald Trump on Sunday issued a warning for New York city mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, the presumptive Democratic nominee who defeated former Governor Andrew Cuomo in last week's primary and sent shockwaves throughout the national political establishment.
The president called Mamdani a "lunatic" and said it was "inconceivable" that the democratic socialist could actually win the mayoral election, but said that if he should succeed, the new mayor is "going to need to do the right thing, or they're not getting any money."
Why It Matters
Mamdani is a New York State assemblyman representing the part of Queens Borough that includes Astoria, Ditmars, and Astoria Heights. He won his seat in 2021 standing as a Democrat, but he identifies as a democratic socialist, specifically.
Thanks to blockbuster endorsements from Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, as well as a platform built on promises that includes free city bus rides, free childcare, and city-owned groceries, Mamdani defied expectations and overcame a gargantuan deficit to defeat Cuomo.
His victory has sparked debate about the direction of the Democratic Party and the influence of progressive platforms, marking a potential shift in national and local Democratic politics.
What To Know
Trump sat down last week for an interview with Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo that aired on Sunday morning. The president discussed a range of topics, including the execution of his immigration policy, his frustration with Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, and the results of the Democratic primary for the mayor of New York City.
As a longtime resident of the city, Trump called Mamdani a "communist" who would be "very bad for New York."
"I don't know that he's going to get in," Trump said. "It's inconceivable that he's, but he's a communist, and he's a pure communist."
"But let's say this. If he does get in, I'm going to be president, and he's going to have to do the right thing, or they're not getting any money. He's going to do the right thing," Trump said. "It's shocking that I would have assumed that—I used to say, we will never have a socialist in this country, no, but we'll have a communist."
"I was very surprised," Trump said, adding that he had "never heard of" Mamdani before the primary, adding, "I don't know who he is."
Trump on Mamdani: "He's a pure communist. I think he admits it ... If he does get in, I'm gonna be president and he's gonna have to the right thing or they're not getting any money. He's gotta do the right thing." pic.twitter.com/a7Lz5M4YG0 — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 29, 2025
Bartiromo noted that Mamdani has already pledged to fight U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) and would work to stymie their operations in the city. She also highlighted a comment Mamdani made in December 2024 in which he said he would arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited New York City.
"As mayor, New York City would arrest Benjamin Netanyahu. This is a city that our values are in line with international law. It's time that our actions are also," Mamdani told former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan.
When asked about Mamdani's comments, Trump said, "Well, he's a radical left lunatic."
However, for all his criticism of Mamdani, Trump refused to back another candidate. Curtis Sliwa once again secured the Republican nomination, but Cuomo and New York City Mayor Eric Adams have announced they will run as independent candidates.
"I don't want to say that because, you know, I have a lot of people, a lot of friends, and I have everybody, so I don't want to get into that," Trump said. "I can tell you this, whoever's mayor of New York is going to have to behave themselves, or the federal government is coming down very tough on them financially."
President Donald Trump answers questions during a press conference on June 27 in Washington, D.C. Inset: New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, a New York Democrat, speaks to supporters during an election night gathering...
President Donald Trump answers questions during a press conference on June 27 in Washington, D.C. Inset: New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, a New York Democrat, speaks to supporters during an election night gathering on June 24 in Long Island City, New York. More// Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
What People Are Saying
Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who caucuses with the Democratic Party, last week wrote on X, formerly Twitter: "Mamdani won. The establishment is in panic. Billionaires are raising money against him; Trump is ranting; Islamophobes are on the loose. They know what we know: Candidates who stand boldly with the working class can win not only in NYC, but anywhere. Let's stand with Zohran."
President Donald Trump last week wrote on Truth Social: "It's finally happened, the Democrats have crossed the line. Zohran Mamdani, a 100% 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, he's got AOC+3, Dummies ALL, backing him, and even our Great Palestinian Senator, Cryin' Chuck Schumer, is groveling over him. Yes, this is a big moment in the History of our Country!"
What Happens Next?
Mamdani, 33, has yet to secure endorsements from the biggest Democratic officials, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, both coincidentally of New York.
The New York City mayoral election will take place on November 4, 2025.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
10 minutes ago
- UPI
Democrat Dwight Evans won't seek re-election in U.S. House
U.S. Rep. Dwight Evans of Pennsylvania speaks during a news conference the U.S. Capitol building in February 2022. On Monday, the Democrat said he would not run for another term. File Photo by Leigh Vogel/UPI | License Photo June 30 (UPI) -- Democratic U.S. House member Dwight Evans said Monday he won't run for election again in 2026 after representing Philadelphia in the chamber since 2016. Evans, 71, suffered a stroke last year and has missed several months of votes. Until his announcement, he said he intended to run again in Pennsylvania's heavy Democratic Third Congressional District in Philadelphia. "Serving the people of Philadelphia has been the honor of my life," Evans said in a statement. "And I remain in good health and fully capable of continuing to serve. After some discussions this weekend and thoughtful reflection, I have decided that the time is right to announce that I will not be seeking re-election in 2026. I will serve out the full term that ends Jan. 3, 2027." He succeeded Chaka Fattah, who resigned after being indicted on federal corruption charges. "I am deeply proud of what I have been able to accomplish over my 45 years in elected office -- from revitalizing neighborhoods block by block to fighting for justice, economic opportunity, investments in infrastructure and education," he said. "I cannot express the gratitude that I have for the trust that voters put in me as their voice in both state and federal office. It has been a privilege of a lifetime to serve as their advocate in government." Evans was elected as the Democratic chairman of the House Appropriations Committee in 1990, serving 20 years. Evans said he has remained "rooted in his neighborhood" throughout his career, and lived just blocks from where he grew up in the city. He was a public school teacher and community organizer with the Urban League until he began working in government at 26 in 1980. He was elected to the state's House of Representatives. State Sen. Sharif Street on Monday posted on X his intention to run for Evans' seat, writing "I'm in." Two state representatives, Chris Raab and Morgan Cephas, told WCAU-TV they are considering seeking the seat. The U.S. House currently has a breakdown of 220 Republicans and 212 Democrats with three vacancies after the death of three Democrats. Longtime Rep. Jan Schakowsky, an 81-year-old Democrat from Illinois, said earlier this year she wouldn't run again. Republican Mark Green of Tennessee said he will retire after the budget policy bill goes through Congress. Another Republican, Don Bacon of Nebraska, plans to retire at the end of the 119th Congress.
Miami Herald
12 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Minnesota agriculture institute joins lawsuit against USDA to save grant funding
WASHINGTON - A Minnesota agriculture group says the Trump administration's canceling of so-called DEI grants in farm country broke the law and imperiled a food network initiative's future, in a federal lawsuit filed in the District of Columbia. The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy in Minneapolis joined other farm sector non-profits who said last week in a lawsuit that the U.S. Department of Agriculture slashed grants for DEI - diversity, equity and inclusion - haphazardly and without individual review, violating federal law. The grants are intended to promote DEI efforts, from a San Francisco Bay Area initiative to boost LGBTQ and multiracial farmers to a New York soil health program. In Minnesota the IATP's grant for $111,695 to finance the MinnieAg Network, including tools for bridging farmers with food and ag industry officials, was terminated just six months from the finish line. That forced the organization to spend $30,000 from its own pocket to finish the grant's goals. "The abrupt and unexpected cancelation of our grant comes at a critical juncture just before we were planning to finalize our 'Farm and Food Systems 101′ resources to make this information available to all," said Erin McKee VanSlooten, Community Food Systems program director at IATP. VanSlooten said the cuts amount to "negating" 18 months of work, and she worries about the program's future. Upon taking office in January, President Trump signed a flurry of executive orders aiming to root out government funding for equity, sustainability and diversity programs under the charges that such programs were discriminatory or wasteful. According to the ag groups' lawsuit, when USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins posted to X that she'd cancelled a grant in the Bay Area to "educate queer, trans and BIPOC urban farmers and consumers about food justice," she said her agency would refocus around "American farming, ranching and forestry." The lawsuit alleges staff at USDA did not properly review programs and the agency could not revoke funding previously granted. The plaintiffs cover a wide swath of agriculture groups working to build pathways for non-traditional farmers to enter the industry, improve soil health and build climate and food resilience. One nonprofit's grant work aimed to build more trees in cities to provide buffers from the heat. Another sought to teach producers about no-till farming. The lawsuit names USDA, Rollins and other Trump administration officials, including the acting director of the Department of Government Efficiency. In a statement, a USDA spokesperson said they would not comment on pending litigation. Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Newsweek
14 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Did Republicans Just Kill the Filibuster?
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Republicans are relying on rarely employed accounting methods to push Donald Trump's "one, big beautiful bill" through the Senate, and in doing so could upend established Congressional procedures surrounding the reconciliation process and the filibuster. Why It Matters The filibuster—a procedural move allowing senators to extend debates on bills indefinitely without a 60-vote majority—has long been viewed as a move to encourage bipartisanship in Congress and as a bulwark against political dominance by slim majorities in the upper chamber. Experts told Newsweek that recent moves by Republicans while trying to pass Trump's tax legislation could create new precedent surrounding the filibuster for years to come, including past the period of GOP control. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham looks out from the upper chamber, June 11, 2025. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham looks out from the upper chamber, June 11, 2025. J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo What To Know Republicans are employing the reconciliation process to pass Trump's tax bill, the centerpiece of his second-term domestic agenda, allowing them to eventually advance the bill with only a majority vote rather than the 60 votes normally needed to do away with the threat of a filibuster. A central element of the bill, which the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates would add $4.2 trillion to the nation's deficit through 2034, is the extension of the tax cuts enacted during Trump's first term. Sweeping fiscal moves of this kind are traditionally restricted by the Byrd Rule, adopted in 1985, which limits the sort of policies that can be folded into bills passed through reconciliation, and forbids legislation from adding to the nation's deficit beyond 10 years. However, as reported by AP, Congressional Budget Office Director Phillip Swagel recently notified Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley of the Senate Budget Committee that elements of the Big, Beautiful Bill would increase the deficit "in years after 2034." Going by this assessment, the Republican bill would violate the rule that determines what legislation can clear the Senate with a simple majority, which could force Republicans to amend significant portions of the legislation. In response to these concerns, and Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough advising that certain provisions in the bill were not budget-related and therefore in violation of Senate rules, Republicans have now argued that Trump's 2017 tax cuts should be treated as part of the fiscal "baseline" forecast, even though these have not yet been extended. Republicans have also cited Section 312 of Congressional Budget Act to argue that the final authority for determining baseline spending figures, and whether the tax portion of the bill violates Byrd, lies with Republican Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham. When approached by Newsweek for comment, a spokesperson for Senator Graham said: "Republicans do not want a $4 trillion tax hike—which is what would happen if the Democrats had their way and the 2017 tax cuts expired." They also referenced past support from Democrats for the notion that the Senate Budget Committee Chairman has the power to establish the baseline, citing former Chairman Bernie Sanders' 2022 remark that "the Budget Committee, through its Chair, makes the call on questions of numbers." Sanders is an independent who caucuses with the Democrats. Experts have said that this new "Byrd Bath"—as it has been referred to by some on Capitol Hill—could establish a new precedent regarding budget reconciliation and the avoidance of filibusters by those in power in the future. "The budget process established in 1974 and reinforced by rules and precedents since then was intended to allow a simple majority to pass a budget as long as the contents of a budget measure were limited to budget-related spending and tax provisions," Steve Smith, professor of politics at Arizona State University, told Newsweek. "Playing partisan games with the budget process to set aside the 10-year budget period or use it for nonbudget purposes is contrary to the plain language of the Budget Act and the Byrd rules adopted by the Senate," he added. "It is a precedent that will get repeated over and over again." Michael Ettlinger, a political adviser who previously worked with the Biden-Harris campaign, said, "If the Republican's new accounting method becomes the norm, it will be far easier to pass deficit increasing legislation in the Senate with a simple majority vote—limiting the impact of the filibuster." Ettlinger, who is currently a senior fellow at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), noted that nothing would then stop Democrats from employing the same precedents to bypass the filibuster in future bills. "If the Democrats reclaim the Senate they will have the opportunity to undermine the filibuster as the Republicans have done," he told Newsweek. "It's their choice." Democratic Senator Rubén Gallego, reiterated this argument, posting to X: "There is no filibuster if the Senate [Republicans] do this and when Dems take power there is no reason why we should not use reconciliation to pass immigration reform." What People Are Saying Democratic Senator Ron Wyden, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, in a statement released Sunday, said: "The only way for Republicans to pass this horribly destructive bill, which is based on budget math as fake as Donald Trump's tan, was to go nuclear and hide it behind a bunch of procedural jargon. We're now operating in a world where the filibuster applies to Democrats but not to Republicans, and that's simply unsustainable given the triage that'll be required whenever the Trump era finally ends." Steve Smith, professor of politics at Arizona State University, told Newsweek: "If a small Senate majority can put anything in a budget measure or ignore the ten-year budget window, then nothing is left for regular legislation that is subject to a filibuster. It represents a "get-it-while-you-can" partisanship that Republicans have adopted since [Mitch] McConnell became leader that, step-by-step, has undermined longstanding Senate norms." Republican Senator and Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham, speaking on the Senate floor on Monday, said: "I'm not the first chairman to change a baseline for different reasons." "The budget Chairman, under [Section] 312, sets the baseline," Graham continued. "This has been acknowledged by Republicans and Democrats." What Happens Next? Debate over President Trump's megabill has now reached the final stages. A "vote-a-rama" on the bill—a marathon session during which lawmakers may introduce amendments to a reconciliation package—kicked off in the Senate on Monday morning. Should the bill pass a Senate vote, expected this week, it will then be sent back down to the House for approval. On Friday, Trump said that his preferred deadline of July 4 was not the "end all," but later said via Truth Social that the House of Representatives "must be ready" to send the bill to his desk by this date.
