How Zohran Mamdani's win upended the economics of NYC voting patterns
Zohran Mamdani ran an avowedly far-left campaign, one focused on kitchen table issues rather than the woke cultural battles we've become accustomed to from the left.
Instead of promising to Defund the Police (though he supported that movement in the past) or hyping the historic nature of becoming the first Muslim mayor of New York City, Mamdani promised free busing, a rent freeze, government-owned supermarkets and free childcare — which he said he'd pay for by raising taxes on businesses and the rich.
6 Zohran Mamdani snagged the Democratic nomination for New York's Mayoral race by appealing to the working class, but securing the votes of the elite.
Derek French/UPI/Shutterstock
Despite the promise of redistributing from each according to his ability, to each according to his need, in an ironic twist, the socialist beat Cuomo handily with wealthy New Yorkers. Meanwhile, Cuomo crushed Mamdani by a staggering 19 points with New Yorkers who make under $50,000 a year.
Mamdani also lost in a big way in New York's majority Black neighborhoods, which overwhelmingly chose Cuomo, as did neighborhoods with the highest Hispanic concentration.
Cuomo succeeded with voters without a college degree, while Mamdani absolutely slaughtered him among voters with advanced degrees. Mamdani's support was strongest with 'youthful, renter-heavy neighborhoods known for their left-leaning politics,' as The New York Times pointed out.
Gentrifiers of the World, unite!
Welcome to the new Democratic Party, same as the old, with a slight twist: Instead of imposing cultural doctrine on working-class people of color with zero interest in their woke ideology, the Dems are now imposing a socialist economic agenda on those same recalcitrant normies who just won't get with the program.
Mamdani's success with the educated continues a decades-long political realignment in which the working class has been steadily leaving the Democratic Party for the GOP, a process that turbocharged under Donald Trump, while the Democrats' base is now college-educated elites.
Nine of the 10 wealthiest congressional districts are currently represented by Democrats, as are 65% of Americans making over $500,000 a year.
6 Mayor Eric Adams is running as an Independent in November against Mamdani.
Brian Zak/NY Post
6 Despite being trounced by Mamdani, Andrew Cuomo has not yet agreed to bow out of the Mayor's race.
Matthew McDermott
The process culminated in the 2024 election with Kamala Harris winning the majority of Americans making over $100,000 a year, while Trump won with those making under.
Rather than a repudiation of the trendline in the Democratic Party, Mamdani's success reveals that even when they talk about kitchen table issues, even when they talk about redistributing resources from the wealthy to the poor, progressives are doing so in a way that speaks to the wealthy and alienates working-class voters.
Mamdani knew how to perfect the lingo of trust fund socialism from personal experience: He himself is from the exact over-educated, over-credentialed, elite background that the Democrats now represent — whether they are pushing socialism or wokeness.
The son of a filmmaker and an academic and educated at a liberal arts college in Maine, Mamdani's campaign staff was equally elite, overrepresented in Ivy League graduates, as reported in the Free Press.
Follow The Post's coverage of the NYC mayoral race
This is not to say that Mamdani's campaign was totally devoid of cultural battles unpopular with working-class voters. Mamdani joined a protest against border czar Tom Homan at the state Capitol, shouting, 'Do you believe in the First Amendment?!' as Homan disappeared down a corridor munching an apple.
Mamdani also opposes the existence of a Jewish state and defended the genocidal cry 'Globalize the Intifada' as being nothing more than a call for Palestinian rights; at Bowdoin College, Mamdani founded his school's chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine.
Like Free Palestine or Defund the Police, Zohran became a synonym for cool among young leftists, a brand for disaffected white college grads. And his victory signals where the Democratic Party might be going.
6 A crowd of people is taking photos and videos of Zohran Mamdani on a screen.
Derek French/Shutterstock
6 Mamadani's supporters skewed younger, wealthier, and Whiter — the exact opposite of the New Yorkers he claims to champion most.
Derek French/UPI/Shutterstock
Wokeness is dead, but it's been replaced by something equally at odds with the working-class voters the Dems lost to President Trump: a redistributionist economic socialism that appeals to the elites in the same way that the 'anti-racism' of Robin DiAngelo and the Abolish ICE of AOC did.
It turns out, working-class New Yorkers, like working-class Americans more generally, don't want government-run supermarkets any more than they want trans athletes in their daughters' sports. They don't want to abolish the police or ICE. They don't want a rent freeze for already rent-stabilized apartments.
They want a fair shot at the American Dream. They want jobs that pay well, less immigration, good healthcare, and — most relevant to the mayor of New York City — safe streets.
6 Zohran Mamdani with his mother, film-maker Mira Nair, and wife, Rama Duwaji, on election night.
REUTERS
Will the Democratic Party ever learn? I wouldn't bet on it. The party's bigwigs have lined up behind Mamdani, with everyone from Chuck Schumer and Hakim Jeffries to Jerry Nadler and Bill Clinton posting in support of his victory. The media has tried to portray this as the right using Mamdani as the poster child for the Democratic Party, but they're doing that all on their own.
The real lesson of Zohran Mamdani's win is this. Though the topic has shifted from culture wars to economics, the Democratic Party still has not learned that the way to get working-class voters is simple: Listen.
Batya Ungar-Sargon is the author of 'Second Class: How the Elites Betrayed America's Working Men and Women.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
3 minutes ago
- The Hill
RFK Jr. on wearing jeans during workouts: ‘Now I'm used to it'
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Tuesday explained why he's often caught wearing jeans during workouts. 'Well, I just started doing that a long time ago because I would go hiking in the morning and then I'd go straight to the gym, and I found it was convenient,' he said during an appearance on Fox News's 'Jesse Watters Primetime.' He added, 'Now I'm used to it, so I just do it.' Kennedy recent posts online showcase him hiking in Colorado, fishing in Idaho and swimming at Rock Creek Park — all in a pair of jeans. His most recent viral post enlists a new workout drill for Americans entitled the ' Bobby Challenge.' The health secretary, who has spearheaded the Trump administration's ' Make America Healthy Again ' (MAHA) agenda, is encouraging people to do 50 pull-ups, 100 push-ups in under five minutes. Kennedy could be seen doing the challenge alongside Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Monday, also in a pair of jeans. 'This is the beginning of our tour challenging Americans to get back in shape,' he said in a clip of the their workout. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy also shared his interest in joining the challenge. ' @SecKennedy and @SecDef — sorry for the late reply, I was busy working double shifts at @USDOT and @NASA. I'm up for the challenge! And I happen to be in Texas with my buddy @WillCain,' he wrote Tuesday on social platform X. 'Let's MAHA.' The initiative also comes after President Trump signed an executive order last month to reestablish the Presidential Fitness Test at public middle and high schools across the U.S. The test is designed to reward students for achievements in physical education.
The Hill
3 minutes ago
- The Hill
Newsom edges out Harris among California Democrats in hypothetical presidential primary: Poll
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) topped former Vice President Harris in a hypothetical 2028 Democratic presidential primary in the Golden State, a new poll found. The survey, released Wednesday from Politico and other partners, shows Newsom in the lead in a wide field of possible contenders with 25 percent among California Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents. Harris came in second with 19 percent, followed by former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg's 13 percent and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's (D-N.Y.) 10 percent. The other possible candidates included all received less than 5 percent, according to the results. The latest poll comes years before any votes will be cast in the next presidential election but is a marker of where opinion in the state may stand at this early stage. Newsom has taken on an increasingly public profile and risen as a top leader within the Democratic Party, most recently leading opposition to Republican efforts to enact mid-decade redistricting and try to pick up several more GOP seats in next year's midterm elections. He has been a rumored possible presidential candidate since before last year's election. Harris, coming off of her defeat to President Trump in November, ended speculation that she would run for California governor to try to succeed Newsom last month when she ruled out a bid. She said she wanted to spend some time outside the political system after years of public service. Her decision added more fuel to speculation that she may take another shot at running for president in 2028. The Politico poll also found that respondents were slightly more excited at the prospect of Newsom running for president than Harris. Almost half said they were 'very' or 'somewhat' excited about the California leader possibly running, while 42 percent said the same about the former vice president. With Newsom as a two-term governor and Harris as a former U.S. senator from California, both would be seen as clear favorites in the Golden State primary, which awards more votes in the nominating process than any other state. The poll was conducted from July 28 to Aug. 12 among 1,445 registered voters, including 807 registered Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents. The margin of error for the entire sample was 2.6 percentage points.
The Hill
3 minutes ago
- The Hill
The future of the ‘special relationship' between the US and UK
Anyone who works in British foreign policy knows that we talk about 'the special relationship' with the U.S. infinitely more than Americans do. But there is a straightforward reason: it really matters to us. It is not just an emotional response, nor an attempt to cling to great-power status. Those are lazy and only partial explanations. The International Relations and Defence Committee in the House of Lords is currently conducting an inquiry into the U.K.'s future relationship with the U.S. In the evidence I submitted, I said very clearly that the U.S. is Britain's most important bilateral ally, in terms of trade, defense, intelligence, diplomacy and myriad cultural and historical connections. But that relationship is always evolving. What Socrates said about the unexamined life applies just as well to unexamined policy assumptions — and in international affairs particularly, nothing is unchanging. The Coalition for Global Prosperity is a nonpartisan group launched in 2018 by former Prime Minister David Cameron and ex-Defence Secretary Penny Mordaunt. It argues for three inseparable pillars in British foreign and security policy: an effective development budget, active diplomacy and a strong defense strategy. Last month, it published a report titled ' Transatlantic Ties: U.K.-U.S. Relations to 2045,' which examines the changing political landscape and proposing ways for the U.K. to strengthen and renew the alliance. (Full disclosure: I was recently appointed senior fellow for national security at the group, but I took the position after the report had been written and had no involvement in its content.) Donald Trump's return to the presidency has shifted U.K.-U.S. relations in ways that have sometimes been uncomfortable for Britain, and which have put new strain on the relationship between our two countries. The report acknowledges that Britain needs to increase its defense expenditure and footprint as part of a fairer burden-sharing. London also has to appreciate Washington's very different perspectives on matters like trade and tariffs, Ukraine and international aid. Disagreements will remain, but they can be managed, provided they are properly understood. Underpinning the report's recommendations is what Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, recently described as a 'reverse-Kennedy' in the age of Trump. European nations should 'ask not what the Americans can do for you, ask what you can do for America.' This does not mean accepting any kind of military or diplomatic vassalage, but identifying areas of common interest where the U.K. can use its particular influence or capabilities for mutual benefit. The report recommends that, while the British government must meet the new NATO defense spending target, it should go further and show leadership, setting out a concrete plan for increasing expenditure on core defense commitments to 3.5 percent of GDP by 2030, well in advance of the agreed upon 2035. No one seriously doubts that the British armed forces need this kind of investment, but putting ourselves ahead of the curve would make a powerful statement of intent to partners and adversaries alike. America's focus on China as the principal threat to its interests over the coming decades is shaping policy across the board, shifting the strategic focus towards the Indo-Pacific. China presents itself as an alternative ally and patron for smaller nations — think of the Belt-and-Road Initiative and Chinese-sponsored maritime facilities in Cambodia, Peru and Sri Lanka. The report urges the U.K. to do much more to challenge this narrative, highlighting China's human rights abuses, repression and self-interest. The U.K. is well placed in this respect because of its membership in so many overlapping forums, including the United Nations, NATO, the G7, the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the World Trade Organization and the Commonwealth. The other recommendations concern what are called 'minilateral' organizations, combinations of a small number of countries to achieve specific, limited objectives. There are several areas in which this approach offers real opportunities: Pillar Two of the tripartite AUKUS agreement, on research, development and production of new technologies; the Joint Expeditionary Force, the U.K.-led alliance of 10 European states that provides rapid response and expeditionary capability in the Baltic and the Arctic region; a proposal to develop a U.S.-U.K.-led minilateral group for 'a radical rethink about priorities and mechanisms of development.' There are two fundamental messages underpinning this. The transatlantic relationship has brought huge benefits to both countries. The U.K. cannot assume it will endure through the simple momentum of history, but it can work to strengthen and renew the relationship through specific, discrete projects that will yield tangible benefits for both countries. This would include an increase in defense spending; taking a harder public line on China; proving how AUKUS can deliver even more for its participants; and inviting U.S. observers to Joint Expeditionary Force summits, so they can see what Europe is doing independently to strengthen its security. Yes, Trump is transactional and wants to see how America gains from every situation. The U.K. has to be focused on issues where it can deliver. If that sounds less elevated and more businesslike than the Atlantic Charter or the emotional bond of the Reagan-Thatcher years, it is only a reflection of a new reality. Eliot Wilson is a freelance writer on politics and international affairs and the co-founder of Pivot Point Group. He was senior official in the U.K. House of Commons from 2005 to 2016, including serving as a clerk of the Defence Committee and secretary of the U.K. delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.
