Dems at a crossroads as establishment plans 'Project 2029' while socialist candidate wins NYC mayoral primary
However, the rank-and-file Democrats who catapulted the party into disarray, losing the White House and Congress in 2024, are already laying post-Trump policy groundwork.
Neera Tanden, who served in the White House during the Clinton, Obama and Biden administrations and testified to Congress last week about her use of the autopen during former President Joe Biden's presidency, along with Biden's former national security advisor, Jake Sullivan, are on the advisory board for "Project 2029."
Andrei Cherny, a former Democratic speechwriter, state party leader and co-founder of a liberal policy journal, is organizing Democratic leaders to create a ready-to-implement agenda for the next Democratic presidential nominee, inspired by the conservative "Project 2025," which was created by the Heritage Foundation ahead of President Donald Trump's 2024 presidential win.
The Democrats' marquee legislative framework for their future nominee will be rolled out over the next two years in quarterly installments through Cherny's publication, "Democracy: A Journal of Ideas." The Democrats plan to turn it into a book, just like Project 2025. The details of "Project 2029" were first reported by The New York Times and have since been confirmed by Fox News Digital.
As The Times revealed the Democratic Party's political stage-setting for years to come, an intraparty reckoning is unfolding in real time following Mamdani's primary win last Tuesday. The institutional policy agenda has emerged during critical conjecture between the past and the future of the Democratic Party.
Mamdani's primary win ignited a progressive buzz reminiscent of "Squad" leader Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's 2018 Democratic primary upset, an excitement that has been on full display during 83-year-old Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders' "Fighting Oligarchy" tour this year.
Both progressive leaders and self-described Democratic socialists endorsed Mamdani ahead of last Tuesday's primary in New York City. Leading up to Election Day, Ocasio-Cortez's fellow "Squad" members, including Reps. Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, also came out in support of the Mamdani movement.
His win shattered expectations and forced Cuomo, who resigned from his governorship in 2021 amid multiple scandals, to concede soon after the polls closed. While Cuomo remains in the race as an independent alongside incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, whose tenure has been plagued by his own scandals, Mamdani's win signaled a departure from the Democratic Party establishment.
Meanwhile, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has faced its own reckoning this year after 25-year-old progressive David Hogg announced his multimillion-dollar plan to primary older incumbent Democrats he claimed were "asleep at the wheel."
Hogg, who campaigned for Mamdani in New York City, ultimately left his vice chair position at the DNC this year as questions remain about the trajectory of a party struggling to find its footing with Trump dominating American politics.
Central to the Democrats' division between its past and future is support for Israel.
Moderate New York Democrats have not outright endorsed Mamdani following his primary win last Tuesday. Party leaders, including Gov. Kathy Hochul, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, confirmed they spoke with Mamdani but have continued to hold their endorsements.
Aside from his socialist promises and anti-capitalist comments, much of establishment Democrats' discontent with Mamdani is rooted in accusations that he is antisemitic.
Rep. Laura Gillen, D-N.Y., said last week that Mamdani is "too extreme to lead New York City." She said he has demonstrated a "deeply disturbing pattern of unacceptable antisemitic comments, which stoke hate at a time when antisemitism is rising."
Another New York Democrat, Rep. Tom Suozzi said last week he still has "serious concerns" about Mamdani.
The crux of accusations that Mamdani is antisemitic stems from his refusal to condemn the rallying cry, "globalize the intifada."
Mamdani has refused to condemn the term, which has been adopted by pro-Palestinian protesters resisting the war in Gaza and, according to the American Jewish Committee, "calls for people from around the globe to participate in rising up against Israel."
Mamdani, who would become New York City's first Muslim mayor if elected in November, has said he doesn't support policing language. In multiple interviews since he initially sparked controversy on the campaign trail, he has refused to condemn the language.
He has also drawn criticism from Jewish New Yorkers, pro-Israel groups and Democrats for defending the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which calls for consumers, companies and governments to cut ties with Israel in an effort to influence the country's policies toward Palestinians.
Mamdani refused to acknowledge, when asked repeatedly on the debate stage, that Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state. Instead, he said that Israel has the right to exist as "a state with equal rights."
On Oct. 13, 2023, six days after the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attacks, Mamdani asked his supporters to join him at a rally outside Schumer's house "to speak out against the indiscriminate killing of Palestinians as we sit on the brink of a genocide."
However, despite the criticism, Mamdani has repeatedly condemned antisemitism.
"Antisemitism is such a real issue in this city, and it has been hard to see it weaponized by candidates who do not seem to have any real interest in tackling it, but rather in using it as a pretext to make political points," he said on the campaign trail ahead of Election Day.
Mamdani did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk Announces New America Party Is Formed Amid Trump Split
Elon Musk speaks during an America PAC town hall in Green Bay, Wisconsin, on Sunday, March 30, 2025. Credit - Jamie Kelter Davis—Getty Images Elon Musk says he has 'formed' his new political party titled the "America Party." The former lead of the Department of Governmental Efficiency (DOGE) had promised to do just that if President Donald Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' passed. Musk has been—and continues to be—a vocal critic of the policy bill, arguing that it will 'cause immense strategic harm' to America on account of the trillions of dollars the bill is projected to add to the debt of the country. 'By a factor of two to one, you want a new political party and you shall have it! When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste and graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy,' Musk said via his social media platform, X, on Saturday, a day after Trump signed the bill. 'Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.' The Tesla CEO had opened a poll on July 4, Independence Day, asking his more than 220 million followers if he should create the new political party. Over 65% of the more than 1.2 million respondents voted 'yes.' Read More: Musk Renews Promise to Start New Rival Political Party as Trump Debates Deporting Him Musk went on to share his potential strategy for 'gaining independence from the two-party system,' arguing that he might try to 'laser-focus on just two or three Senate seats and eight to 10 House districts' for his party. 'Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people,' Musk elaborated. But as for what exactly Musk plans to do with his rival third party is largely open for discussion. Musk has yet to share any specific proposed policies or explicitly state what the core tenets of his party would what we do—and don't—know about Musk's vision for the America Party and how it came to be. When Musk floated the idea of creating a new political party in early June amid the very public fracturing of his relationship with Trump, his one-time ally, Musk after conducting a poll said: 'The people have spoken. A new political party is needed in America to represent the 80% in the middle!' He appeared to be referring to those who may not feel seen or represented by either the Republican Party or Democratic Party. Musk, the country's biggest Republican donor, is seemingly committed to campaigning against any Republicans who showed support and voted for the Big, Beautiful Bill that he so vehemently opposes. 'Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame!' Musk said on June 30. 'And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth.' If he so desired, Musk could target pivotal congressional seats in an effort to turn them and thus potentially have the upper hand during votes on key matters. He seemingly referenced this plan with his July 4 post about establishing a 'laser-focus on just two or three Senate seats and eight to 10 House districts.' Musk did not elaborate or specify which seats would be at the center of his focus. While Musk has yet to share an actual policy platform for his party, he has reposted and responded affirmatively to some of his X followers' posts about what the platform could be. What appears to be on the docket is a platform that prioritizes cuts on debt and excess spending within the government, similar to what Musk pushed for during his time in the White House. One of Musk's followers asked: 'Is this the America Party platform?' They went on to list the following stances: Reduce debt, responsible spending only Modernize military with AI/robotics Pro tech, accelerate to win in AI Less regulation across board, but especially in energy Free speech Pro natalist Centrist policies everywhere else In response, Musk said 'yeah!' and went on to repost the list to his millions of followers, but stopped short of providing his own official policy plan. Read More: Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Faces Opposition From Musk and Some Republicans as Senate Narrowly Votes to Advance It Though Musk had voted Democrat previously, he played a vital role for the Republican Party when he became the largest donor of the 2024 presidential race, predominantly funding Trump's campaign but also financially backing other Republicans via his super political action committee (PAC) titled America PAC. Musk became a close ally of Trump's and appeared at major campaign rallies with him, addressing large crowds and urging them to vote for Trump. As a sign of their close working relationship, Trump appointed Musk as the lead of DOGE, a role he held until May. During his tenure, Musk became known for actualizing Trump's vision of cutting 'waste' in the government, which amounted to laying off thousands of federal employees. But Musk and Trump's relationship soured, especially after the former took a public stance against the spending bill. 'I think a bill can be big or it could be beautiful,' Musk told CBS News in May, shortly before he announced his DOGE departure. 'But I don't know if it could be both.' Going a step further in early June, Musk said the 'massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination' and told his millions of followers to 'call your Senator, call your Congressman… kill the bill!' Musk and Trump engaged in an all-out war of words, exchanging jabs and lobbying threats—with Trump threatening to take away the government contracts for Musk's companies, including the SpaceX firm that has become a critical player for NASA. Trump has repeatedly claimed that the falling out stemmed from Musk being unhappy over changes to the Electric Vehicle [EV] mandate. Tensions reignited once more when Musk renewed his calls for the policy bill not to be passed. When asked by reporters on July 1 if he was planning to deport Musk, who has U.S. and South African citizenship, Trump replied: 'I don't know, we'll have to take a look.' 'We might have to put DOGE on Elon. The monster that might have to go back and eat Elon. Wouldn't that be terrible?' Trump said, appearing to refer to the contracts and subsidies that Musk's prominent businesses have from the federal government. Read More: Musk Floats Idea of Starting New Rival Political Party—and Even Names It—Amid Trump Feud Though Musk is looking to build a viable, competitive third party, it requires more than an X poll to actualize it in the U.S.. In fact, many have tried before. Two major parties—Democratic and Republican—have dominated U.S. politics and no third party in recent memory has been able to penetrate the two-party system in a meaningful way. Former 2020 Democratic presidential primary candidate Andrew Yang has pushed for representation beyond the two-party system, but has arguably encountered limited success with his Forward Party. In June, Yang expressed a keenness to join forces with Musk, seemingly hoping that the two of them may have a stronger chance of succeeding. 'Elon has built world-class companies from nothing more than an idea multiple times, and in this instance, you have the vast majority of Americans who are hungry for a new approach,' Yang said in an interview with Politico. 'I'm happy to spell it out for Elon, or anyone else who wants to head down this road. A third party can succeed very quickly.' Part of the reason third parties struggle is due to the U.S.' 'winner takes all' system in the Electoral College. 48 out of the 50 States award Electoral votes on a winner-takes-all basis (so does the District of Columbia). This makes voting for third party candidates difficult. For example, support for the Tea Party held strong at 24% according to polls in the 2010s, though they rarely held significant political power, since the Republicans were often fearful of splitting votes in races with narrow margins, which would have risked giving the election to Democratic candidates. Contact us at letters@
New York Post
7 minutes ago
- New York Post
Unlike Zohran Mamdani, most Dems want prosperity — not class warfare
Liberals and progressives are celebrating Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani's primary victory as proof that New York City is ready for a 'democratic socialist' revolution. They're badly in need of a history lesson: Every socialist revolution has failed and set back the goals it meant to accomplish. Everywhere it has been tried, socialism has meant economic decay at best and mass death at worst. The global death toll from socialism and communism is roughly 100 million souls. Whether the victims died in Stalinist gulags, Mao's Great Leap famine or Pol Pot's 'killing fields,' the underlying logic was the same: When the state owns everything, the individual owns nothing — not even his life. Mamdani's own platform may seem more anodyne, but it is a distilled sampler of socialism's greatest failures: nationalized businesses (public utilities), price controls (rent freezes, 'affordable' everything) and government-run retail. Meanwhile, capitalism's ledger shows no mass graves — only the lifted living standards of billions. Even China's rise from Mao-made famine to middle-class affluence began the day Deng Xiaoping opened markets and let peasants keep what they grew. Mamdani promises city-run groceries to 'bring down prices,' as if 8 million New Yorkers will flock to a public-owned store without remembering Venezuela's empty-shelf socialism. He proposes a rent freeze, forcing down the price of housing. Berlin's leftist government tried the same stunt with its 2020 Mietendeckel: Apartment listings collapsed 41.5% in a single year. He proposes fare-free buses. Tallinn, Estonia, made transit free in 2013; a Royal Institute of Technology audit found ridership rose barely 3% and car traffic scarcely fell, even as taxpayers picked up the heavy bill. He proposes no-cost child care. Quebec's celebrated '$5-a-day' day care ballooned in cost and delivered a 'sizeable negative shock to non-cognitive skills' that lingered into adolescence, per the National Bureau of Economic Research — along with higher crime and lower life satisfaction. All this is funded, naturally, by punishing 'the rich' — until they decamp to Florida, just as over a million wealth-holders fled Fidel Castro's Cuba, 6 million Venezuelans (most college educated) abandoned Nicolás Maduro's 'Bolivarian miracle' and 15% of Russia's millionaires bolted in a single year once Vladimir Putin's neo-Soviet expansion started. The socialist mayoral hopeful's web site also touts 'public ownership of utilities,' a polite phrase for state takeover of the power grid. Another of Mamdani's proposals is boosting the city's minimum wage to $30 an hour by 2030 — an 82% jump. Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post's signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here! That would saddle small employers with entry-level labor costs near $65,000 a year, forcing many to lay off staff, automate or close — and leave fewer rungs on the ladder for new workers. Then there's policing. This may be the part of Mamdani's platform that is most acutely not what it seems. In 2020, Mamdani embraced 'defund the police' during the city's summer of riots. Now he says he merely wants to shift funds to a new Department of Community Safety. Here's the irony socialists rarely acknowledge: Every successful socialist leader, from Venezuela's Hugo Chávez and Maduro Venezuela to Colombia's Gustavo Petro and Mexico's Claudia Sheinbaum's Mexico, has depended on a stronger, more intrusive police force to enforce rationing, suppress dissent and make those neat five-year plans look 'orderly.' Finally, his 'Trump-proofing' proposal — getting ICE out of NYC and ending any cooperation with the feds — sounds like an open invitation for gangs like the Tren de Aragua and MS-13. Do New York City socialists expect everyone to hold hands and sing Kumbaya? Mamdani's agenda is doomed to fail because it doesn't understand that NYC's problem is not capitalism but its own government. High costs in New York stem from layers of policy that strangle them: restrictive zoning locks 75% of residential land into one- and two-family lots, prevailing-wage and union rules push subway construction to an eye-watering $2 billion to $3 billion per mile, and the New York City Housing Authority's $80 billion repair backlog shows what happens when government runs housing. Add the nation's heaviest big-city tax burden and miles of red tape, and you've got an economy in which prices climb and paychecks stall. Why are Democrats doing this to themselves? Part of the answer is Donald Trump. An unconventional Republican back in the White House has driven many liberals to think the best response is a hard-left hook. But backing Mamdani's agenda clashes with that of the majority of Democratic voters who value prosperity over class warfare — among them the millions of Latinos who've escaped socialism, support Democrats and now face a party willing to impose on them the very ideas that prompted them to flee. Santiago Vidal Calvo is a policy analyst at the Manhattan Institute. The views are his own and not those of the Manhattan Institute.
USA Today
10 minutes ago
- USA Today
'Attack on rural America': Kentucky governor hits Medicaid cuts in Trump's megabill
Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear argued the Medicaid cuts in President Donald Trump's sweeping tax policy bill will have a 'devastating' impact on rural communities. 'It's the single worst piece of legislation I've seen in my lifetime, and it is a congressional Republican and presidential attack on rural America,' the Democrat told CNN's Dana Bash in a July 6 interview on "State of the Union." He said around 200,000 people in Kentucky are could lose their healthcare under the bill, which implements new work requirements for Medicaid and a raft of other restrictions that healthcare experts argue will trigger hospital closures in rural areas. Lawmakers included a $50 billion fund in the legislation to prop up these hospitals, but experts say it won't be enough to make up for the $155 billion expected decline in federal Medicaid spending in rural areas. Beshear, who is considered a potential presidential candidate for the party in 2028, said up to 35 rural hospitals in Kentucky could be at risk of closing as a result of the bill. 'What that means is our economy takes a huge hit,' he said. 'You lose 200 jobs from doctors and nurses and orderlies and all of a sudden the coffee shop does worse, the bank doesn't have as many folks coming in. This is going to hit rural America right in the face.' Still, Republicans have argued that the biggest expected cut to Medicaid – the implementation of work requirements for able-bodied adults – is popular among voters, and other changes such as more frequent eligibility checks are common sense options. Democrats "unfortunately seem to think that poor people are stupid. I don't think poor people are stupid. I think they have agency, and I think to have them register twice a year for these benefits is not a burden," Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also said on CNN on July 6. "People who want to infantilize the poor and people who need these Medicaid benefits are alarmist.' Republicans in Congress passed the massive tax-cut and spending package on July 3. Trump signed it into law on July 4. It was the key goal for Trump and Republican leadership in Congress, which captured a trifecta during the 2024 elections and has used that political muscle to force what they've dubbed their "One Big, Beautiful Bill" through both chambers at a rapid-fire pace. The passage came despite deep reservations within their own party and unanimous opposition from Democrats who see it as a ticket to winning back congressional majorities in 2026.
