How Zohran Mamdani's win in New York City mayoral primary could ripple across the US
Lincoln Mitchell, Columbia University
Top Republicans and Democrats alike are talking about the sudden rise of 33-year-old Zohran Mamdani, a state representative who won the Democratic mayoral primary in New York on June 24, 2025, in a surprising victory over more established politicians.
While President Donald Trump quickly came out swinging with personal attacks against Mamdani, some establishment Democratic politicians say they are concerned about how the democratic socialist's progressive politics could harm the broader Democratic Party and cause it to lose more centrist voters.
New York is a unique American city, with a diverse population and historically liberal politics. So, does a primary mayoral election in New York serve as any kind of harbinger of what could come in the rest of the country?
Amy Lieberman, a politics and society editor at The Conversation US, spoke with Lincoln Mitchell, a political strategy and campaign specialist who lectures at Columbia University, to understand what Mamdani's primary win might indicate about the direction of national politics.
Does Mamdani's primary win offer any indication of how the Democratic Party might be transforming on a national level?
Mamdani's win is clearly a rebuke of the more corporate wing of the Democratic Party. I know there are people who say that New York is different from the rest of the country. But from a political perspective, Democrats in New York are less different from Democrats in the rest of country than they used to be.
That's because the rest of America is so much more diverse than it used to be. But if you look at progressive politicians now in the House of Representatives and state legislatures, they are being elected from all over – not just in big cities like New York anymore.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
How America Redrew The Middle East: Every Time It Intervened
New Delhi: The Middle East has seen the map of power redrawn time and again in the long shadow of the United States. Each turn of the Washington's wheel – whether in Iran, Lebanon, Iraq or Gaza – left behind a trail of upheaval. The reasons varied. Oil, ideology and rivalries. The results often followed a similar pattern. Regimes fell, alliances shifted and people suffered. Let's trace the most defining episodes where America's hand shaped the region and how each one ended up altering not just borders, but lives. 1953, Iran In the early 1950s, Iran's elected leader wanted control over the country's oil. British companies resisted. The United States stepped in, fearing a tilt toward the Soviet bloc. Its Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) backed street protests, media manipulation and palace intrigue. The elected government crumbled. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran, returned to power. He ruled with American support for decades. The resentment brewed slowly. In 1979, it exploded into revolution. Tehran has never forgotten that coup. 1958, Lebanon Tension was rising in Lebanon. The Cold War had reached Arab soil. The president, leaning west, faced revolt at home. The United States invoked its new Eisenhower Doctrine and sent troops. Marines landed at Beirut airport. Their mission was to keep things calm, not to fight. It worked for the moment. But it left Lebanon's delicate sectarian balance shaken. The long-term fire had not been put out. Just postponed. 1973, Yom Kippur War On a holy day, Israeli soldiers were caught off guard. Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack. The United States responded with an airlift of weapons and supplies to Israel. The war turned. But the cost was global. Arab states punished the West with an oil embargo. Long fuel lines. Soaring prices. A warning shot for American dependency. And yet, the US-Israel military bond grew stronger than ever. 1991, The Gulf War Saddam Hussein crossed a line literally. His tanks rolled into Kuwait. The world responded with resolutions and warplanes. America led a coalition of dozens. The campaign was swift. The footage, cinematic. Desert Storm was hailed as a success. But it left Iraq isolated, sanctioned and smoldering. A decade of internal repression followed. Children died of hunger and medicine shortages. Saddam stayed in power, but Iraq's spirit dimmed. 2003, Iraq Again A file. A fear. A flawed case. Washington claimed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. None were found. Still, the invasion went ahead. Baghdad fell. Saddam vanished and then was captured. The regime collapsed. But what came next was chaos. Armed groups clashed. Militias rose. The Islamic State grew from the wreckage. Democracy was promised. Instead, instability took hold. Millions displaced. Hundreds of thousands dead. The scars remain. Across Decades, a Pattern Intervention did not always mean invasion. Sometimes it came in secret. Sometimes with soldiers. Sometimes through sanctions or airstrikes. But rarely did it end as planned. Regimes were toppled. But peace rarely followed. Trust evaporated. Generations grew up under rubble and barbed wire. Each time, Washington claimed to act for freedom, stability or self-defense. Each time, the ground beneath shifted. Sometimes for a week. Sometimes forever. What lingers is the memory. In the cities where bombs fell. In the markets where sanctions bit. In the homes where sons never returned.
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
Nearly 12 million Americans to lose health coverage under Trump's budget bill, CBO warns
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel The sweeping budget bill backed by President Donald Trump and Senate Republicans is projected to strip health insurance from nearly 12 million Americans over the next decade, according to a nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) analysis released Saturday bill, which narrowly advanced in the Senate with a 51-49 vote, would enact historic cuts to Medicaid and scale back key provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), marking the most dramatic rollback of federal health coverage in modern U.S. CBO estimates that 11.8 million people would become uninsured by 2034 if the Senate's version of the bill becomes law—nearly one million more than projected under the House's version. The legislation calls for more than $1.1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, and Obamacare over the next decade, with Medicaid alone accounting for over $1 trillion of those reductions. These cuts would hit low-income families, children, seniors, and people with disabilities the hardest, as Medicaid currently covers over 71 million bill introduces strict new work requirements for many adults on Medicaid, including parents of children as young as 14, and imposes new co-payments for Medicaid services. It also reduces federal support for Medicaid expansion and alters tax credits that help millions afford ACA plans, changes that experts warn will disproportionately impact the South and West, where uninsured rates are already highest. According to Aaron Carroll, president and CEO of a major health policy group, 'The effects could be catastrophic,' with many forced to pay out-of-pocket for care, delay treatment, or lose access to essential proposed cuts have sparked deep divisions within the Republican Party . While fiscal conservatives push for deeper reductions, others—like Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who announced he would not seek re-election after opposing the bill—have voiced concerns about the impact on their constituents and local hospitals. Democrats have uniformly opposed the measure, using Senate rules to delay a final vote and warning of the bill's consequences for American families.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
It took 16 hours to read Trump's 940-page, foot-high bill aloud. Now the long debate begins
Hours before a tumultuous nearing-midnight vote on President Donald Trump's package of tax breaks, spending cuts and increased deportation money, a Republican senator stood on the chamber floor and implored the plan's critics, "Read the bill.' The Peace Monument is seen in front of the US Capitol dome on June 29, 2025, as US President Donald Trump�s Big Beautiful Bill continues through the Senate. US senators debated into the early hours of Sunday Donald Trump's "big beautiful" spending bill, a hugely divisive proposal that would deliver key parts of the US president's domestic agenda while making massive cuts to social welfare programs. (Photo by Jim WATSON / AFP)(AFP) After the dramatic 51-49 roll call late Saturday, Senate Democrats did exactly that. Unable to stop the march toward passage of the 940-page bill by Trump's Fourth of July deadline, the minority party in Congress is using the tools at its disposal to delay and drag out the process. 'If Senate Republicans won't tell the American people what's in this bill, then Democrats are going to force this chamber to read it from start to finish," said Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer. By Sunday midafternoon some 16 hours later, the clerk's reading of the nearly foot-high bill was done. And within moments, the Senate launched debate. But it's still going to be a while, at least 10 hours of speeches stretching late into the night. The slow-walking tactic points to difficult days ahead. 'It's taken a while to get here,' said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., the Budget Committee chairman, 'but we'll have a debate worthy of this great country.' Republicans, who have control of the House and Senate, are closer to passing Trump's signature domestic policy package, yet there is political unease. Democratic lawmakers immediately launched fresh challenges against it, decrying the way they say Republicans are hiding the true costs by using unusual budgeting. A new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget office Sunday estimates the Senate bill would increase the deficit by nearly $3.3 trillion from 2025 to 2034, a nearly $1 trillion increase over the House-passed bill. It also found that 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law, more than with the House's approach. Republican holdouts remain reluctant to give their votes, and their leaders have almost no room to spare, given their narrow majorities. Essentially, they can afford three dissenters in the Senate, with its 53-47 GOP edge, and about as many in the House, if all members are present and voting. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., had sent his colleagues home for the weekend. Trump, who has at times allowed wiggle room on his deadline, kept the pressure on lawmakers to finish. But the tense scene as voting came to a standstill for more than three hours Saturday night let the internal discord play out in public. In the end, Republicans Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Rand Paul of Kentucky opposed the motion to move ahead, joining all 47 Democrats. Trump noticed. He threatened to campaign against Tillis, who was worried that Medicaid cuts would leave many without health care in his state. Trump badgered Tillis again on Sunday morning, saying the senator 'has hurt the great people of North Carolina.' Later Sunday, Tillis issued a lengthy statement announcing he would not seek reelection in 2026. Republicans are using their majorities to push aside Democratic opposition, but have run into a series of political and policy setbacks. Not all GOP lawmakers are on board with proposals to reduce spending on Medicaid, food stamps and other programs as a way to help cover the cost of extending some $3.8 trillion in Trump tax breaks. Renewed pressure to oppose the bill came from Elon Musk, who criticized it as 'utterly insane and destructive.' If the Senate is able to pass the package in the days ahead, the bill would return to the House for a final round of votes before it could reach the White House. Tax breaks and core GOP priorities At its core, the legislation would make permanent many of the tax breaks from Trump's first term that would otherwise expire by year's end if Congress fails to act, resulting in a potential tax increase on Americans. The bill would add new breaks, including no taxes on tips, and commit $350 billion to national security, including for Trump's mass deportation agenda. But the cutbacks to Medicaid, food stamps and green energy investments are also causing dissent within GOP ranks. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said the environmental rollbacks would amount to a "death sentence' for America's wind and solar industries. The Republicans are relying on the reductions to offset the lost tax revenues but some lawmakers say the cuts go too far, particularly for people receiving health care through Medicaid. Meanwhile, conservatives, worried about the nation's debt, are pushing for steeper cuts. Democrats can't filibuster, but can stall Using a congressional process called budget reconciliation, the Republicans can muscle the bill through on a simple majority vote in the Senate, rather than the typical 60-vote threshold needed to overcome objections. Without the filibuster, Democrats in the minority have to latch on to other tools to mount their objections. One is the full reading of the bill text, which has been done in past situations. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., forced a 2021 reading of a COVID relief package. Democrats also intend to use their full 10 hours of available debate time, now underway. And then Democrats are prepared to propose dozens of amendments to the package that would be considered in an all-night voting session — or all-day, depending on the hour. A roll call full of drama As Saturday's vote tally teetered, attention turned to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who was surrounded by GOP leaders in intense conversation. She voted 'yes.' Several provisions in the package are designed for her state in Alaska. A short time later, Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., drew holdouts Sen. Rick Scott of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming to his office. Vice President JD Vance joined in. The talks dragged on. Then Vance led them all back in to vote. Later, Scott said he had met with the president, adding, 'We all want to get to yes.' Lee said the group "had an internal discussion about the strategy to achieve more savings and more deficit reduction, and I feel good about the direction where this is going, and more to come.'
