
Minnesota's Mamdani: Socialist wants to replace police with ‘peace officers'
'If you do that, safety goes out the window, and the very people that are screaming are the ones who get hurt. So it doesn't make any sense to me.'
Mr Fateh has criticised Mr Frey, who has served as mayor of Minneapolis since 2018, for failing to 'fight' President Donald Trump on immigrant rights and has previously introduced legislation to make Minnesota a 'sanctuary' state.
Like Mr Mamdani, he has pledged to raise the minimum wage – though to $20 an hour compared to $30 in New York – establish rent controls, and 'protect our city from a hostile White House'.
Accusing the mayor of criminalising homelessness in Minneapolis, Mr Fateh said he would increase funding for shelters and take a 'compassionate approach' to encampments.
With homeless encampments leaping up across many Democrat-run cities, notably San Francisco and San Diego in California, the issue is a politically-charged one and prompted many liberal bastions to swing right in recent elections.
To pay for his campaign promises, Mr Fateh has said he wants to institute an income tax to 'ensure the wealthy pay their fair share', while floating a flurry of other levies including a commercial vacancy tax and a land value tax.
'He's coming in with a socialist agenda'
Mr Peppin said he expected Minneapolis' business community to be in a 'near panic' about the prospect of Mr Fateh becoming mayor.
'The downtown business community – I wouldn't necessarily say they had an ally in Jacob Frey… but they had somebody who would listen,' he said.
'I question whether Omar Fateh is going to be somebody who will even listen to the business community. I think he's coming in with a socialist agenda, and he will do nothing but give lip service to any of them.'
Mr Frey is challenging the DFL's endorsement of his rival, citing 'flawed and irregular conduct' at the convention.
It is far from the first such controversy Mr Fateh has been involved in.
In 2022, the candidate's brother-in-law, Muse Mohamud Mohamed, was convicted of perjury and sentenced to house arrest about his handling of mail-in ballots during his 2020 primary campaign.
Three voters testified they did not know him and had not asked him to pick up their ballots.
Mr Fateh, who ended up winning the election to state senate by around 2,000 votes, disclaimed any knowledge of Mr Mohamed's actions.
Ethics investigation
He was also investigated by a state senate ethics committee for allegedly receiving free advertising from Somali TV of Minnesota, a YouTube channel.
Mr Fateh said he had failed to include paying $1,000 for the adverts in his campaign reports. He was ordered to take part in campaign finance training but the committee did not find any evidence of a 'quid pro quo'.
Controversially, in 2023 he faced another ethics probe over allegedly suggesting Republican senators resembled violent terrorists who 'advocate for the superiority of the white race'.
While many commentators and state media have drawn the comparison to Mr Mamdani, Mr Fateh is still yet to attract the following commanded by the New York mayoral candidate, who swept to victory last month over the former state governor Andrew Cuomo.
Some suggest Mr Fateh, though in his mid-30s, does not have the social media savvy or charisma of his New York counterpart, and so far he has not been endorsed by leading Left-wing figures like Bernie Sanders or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Still, the ascent of the 'Minnesota Mamdani' comes just weeks after the New Yorker's win. There may be more Mamdanis to come.
Hashtags

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


Sky News
13 minutes ago
- Sky News
Michael Clarke Q&A: How much will Putin get away with at Alaska meeting with Trump?
Send us your questions about Trump-Putin meeting and war in Ukraine Michael Clarke, our military analyst, is back later today to answer your Ukraine war questions. It could be a hugely significant week for the future of the conflict and peace in Europe, with Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin meeting in Alaska on Friday. Use the form at the top of this page to get in touch with your question for Clarke. He'll answer them live at 2pm.


Daily Mail
13 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Kamala Harris slammed over insanely mean-spirited way she treated JD Vance's children
JD Vance revealed that his family's transition into the vice president's residence was awkward, after Vice President Kamala Harris ignored the tradition of inviting his family to visit the property before the inauguration. 'They had never seen this house and Usha really wanted to show them,' Vance revealed. He said that he and his staff knew the politics of the situation could be uncomfortable, but proposed the idea of Usha and the kids visiting the home to Harris and her staff. 'They were rebuffed,' Vance said. The vice president's residence is a 9,000 square foot Queen Anne style home with 33-rooms, a wraparound porch, grand staircases and elegant turrets. Modern vice presidents typically host the incoming vice president and their families to introduce them to the residence that is about two miles from the White House. Vice President Dick Cheney and his wife Lynn welcomed incoming Vice President Joe Biden in 2009 and the Bidens extended the same courtesy to the Pence family in 2016. The Pence family didn't host Harris and her husband Doug Emhoff to the residence in the aftermath of the 2020 election. The coronavirus pandemic and the politically tumultuous environment surrounding Trump's challenge to the results complicated a meet-up. Sources close to Harris at the time explained that she and Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff were preoccupied with pressing matters—namely a canceled overseas trip and the wildfires in California, according to CBS News. But some people view Harris' response to Vance as a snub, which the vice president addressed in an interview with the Katie Miller podcast. 'Wow, Kamala's already dodging basic courtesy?' wrote one user on social media, 'Refusing to let the kids see their future home is just petty.' 'Very telling. Thank goodness we literally dodged that bullet,' wrote another person. 'It's probably just as well that his sweet young children weren't exposed to that woman & her dysfunctional family members,' another Vance supporter unloaded. Vance said that Harris left a 'nice note' in his office that was 'boilerplate' and 'not particularly profound' but very 'polite.' Not since Vice President Al Gore and his family moved into the home in 1993 have young children lived in the vice president's residence. The Bidens frequently hosted his grandchildren in the building and Harris welcomed her young nieces for visits. But the Vance family have now made the home their own, complete with desks for the kids to do school work and a golf simulator for the vice president. 'It actually feels like a real home now,' he said. Vance said that Usha Vance still liked to go grocery shopping, but that they still had a staff to keep the house stocked with food and prepare meals. 'It's kind of a crazy new world we live in, but there are definitely perks to it,' he admitted. He conceded he still liked to make breakfast for the kids to keep some normalcy around the house. 'I try to have as many of these rituals as possible that just remind the kids, I'm still your dad, we still have a mostly normal family life, even though there are cameras constantly around,' he said.


The Guardian
43 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump swallowing Putin's lies is a bigger threat to Ukraine than bombs
Wars do not have to be won. Total victories loom largest in the popular imagination because those are the stories nations always tell to sustain patriotic feeling. The fuller version of history is written in stalemates. That is worth remembering when Donald Trump meets Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. Both leaders have incentives to pretend that Ukraine's fate can be settled decisively without any Ukrainians at the negotiating table. That doesn't make it so. For the US president, this is a project of personal vanity. He promised to end the war within days of returning to the White House. The persistence of hostilities seven months after his inauguration is a rebuke to his self-image as the world's master dealmaker. Putin also once thought the war could be concluded swiftly. He launched his all-out invasion in February 2022 expecting Kyiv to fall within weeks. When Ukrainian resistance thwarted that plan, the Russian president switched to a long game of attrition, relying on superior troop numbers and aerial bombardment to degrade Ukraine's viability as a sovereign state. Russia's industrial base and public opinion have been fired up for perpetual war. Kremlin propagandists boast of the nation's limitless military stamina, while Russian commanders keep promising to break through enemy lines and initiate the long-awaited capitulation. Putin has to believe in the inevitability of Ukrainian defeat because any other scenario – even a ceasefire that allows him to hold territory captured so far – leaves the historic mission he set himself unfulfilled. He will harbour a vengeful grievance for as long as Volodymyr Zelenskyy is president of a country that is free to arm itself and pursue an independent policy of integration with other European democracies. Any border or treaty that prevents the Kremlin dictating Ukraine's strategic orientation is illegitimate in Putin's eyes. That won't prevent him signing bits of paper as a tactical expedient. The Russian president recognises that he has tested his American counterpart's patience. He has lost ground to Zelenskyy in the competition to shape Trump's explanation for why the war persists when he has called for peace. The Ukrainian president has bounced back from his televised humiliation in the White House in February, when he was harangued for ingratitude and blamed for inciting the invasion of his own country. Deft diplomacy, underwritten by Nato leaders pledging to pay Kyiv's military bills, bought a sliver of recognition from Trump that maybe things were more complicated than previously thought; that Putin was prone to 'bullshit'; that his professed interest in peace was contradicted by the volume of bombs he kept dropping on Ukrainian civilians. The Alaska powwow is happening because Trump started setting ceasefire deadlines and threatening Moscow with sanctions. Putin needed to offer some affectation of willingness to compromise. He calculated that the spectacle of a summit, combined with some artfully ambiguous signals around 'land swaps', would appeal to Trump's confidence in his own charisma and his belief that a deal is there for the doing. Putin will use the encounter to frame the conflict in terms that chime with Trump's warped and historically illiterate reading of the story. It is the version in which a devious, criminal Zelenskyy bamboozles a senescent Joe Biden into throwing away heaps of US treasure on a crazy, losing bet. The war is nearly won anyway, Putin will say. Ukraine cannot prevail, but can sucker its allies into throwing good money after bad. He will outline a future of lucrative commercial relations between two great powers whose potential friendship has been sabotaged by a roguish European province that hardly even counts as a proper country. He will make grotesque territorial claims, covering places not yet conquered by Russian troops, and present this as the bare minimum of a reasonable allocation of land to Moscow. He will insist on Ukrainian 'demilitarisation' – in effect guaranteeing the country's vulnerability to some future incursion – and call it essential for the sake of Russian security. We know these are the demands because Putin has been making them for months. He restated them earlier this month. Trump doesn't have to fall in a bromantic swoon at Putin's feet to make the summit a success for Russia. The damage will be done if he emerges from negotiations parroting talking points from the Kremlin script. The fear among Ukraine's European allies is that he will proudly outline a ceasefire proposal on terms that Zelenskyy cannot possibly accept – an unjust, unworkable partition of his country along lines drawn by the tyrant who invaded it. Putin will then claim that he tried to talk peace and only Ukrainian intransigence prolongs the war. Less bleak scenarios are conceivable. Trump's newfound scepticism about Putin might withstand corrosion by flattery. The Russian leader's confidence in an imminent battlefield breakthrough might prove misplaced – a symptom of the brittle, authoritarian ego that only gives audience to sycophants bearing good tidings. He might be overestimating Russia's economic resilience against sanctions. He might one day find ordinary Russians losing the will to sacrifice a generation of young men for a goal of national redemption that keeps receding over the horizon. When the domestic economic and political incentives change, Putin will get serious about a ceasefire. The task of Ukraine's allies is to hasten that moment by sustaining maximum military aid to Kyiv and financial pressure on Moscow. Even then, a settlement would realistically leave some Ukrainian land under de facto permanent Russian occupation, behind heavily fortified lines. It will be a stalemate backed with sufficient deterrents to turn a hot war cold. It could end up looking something like the demilitarised zone on the Korean peninsula, separating two sides that are technically still at war, although the armistice was signed in 1953 For now, the challenge for Zelenskyy and his allies is handling a US president who talks about war and peace in terms detached from any moral, historical or strategic context. Trump draws no meaningful distinction between a settlement that allows Ukraine to thrive as an independent state and one that satisfies the appetite of a Russian president bent on conquest. He values two kinds of deal – those that make him richer, and those that allow him to luxuriate in the status of a great dealmaker. If he thinks such benefits are available by abandoning American allies and interests there is no reason to think he wouldn't do it. That will be Putin's aim in Alaska. He has no intention of ending the war just because the White House demands it, but he knows he must pretend to want peace. And he knows his best hope of defeating Ukraine is to manipulate Trump into bullying Kyiv towards capitulation, while imagining that his own humiliation at Kremlin hands is some kind of personal victory. Rafael Behr is a Guardian columnist