This would be a good point, except that Mamdani actually already beat a bunch of solid candidates during the primary. He leaped ahead of more well known local politicians like Brad Lander, who are well liked, and do not have the kind of baggage that Eric Adams and Cuomo do.
I think one of the things that made the primary different is that RCV made it possible to have progressive candidates work together against Cuomo, whereas usually too many progressives going after each other opens the door for someone like Eric Adams.
RCV gave us Adams last time despite him being the worst of the bunch aside from Sliwa. Candidates didn't work together until the end, and that attention squeezed out candidates who had considerable experience, but not the money, tv air time, and name recognition. It didn't help make it equitable
This year is very different: 1. Progressives (and voters) didn’t know how to best utilize RCV & cross endorsements the first time. 2. Progressives were not united in 2020 against a single toxic candidate the way they are for Cuomo / Eric Adams. 3. Usually Dems wouldn’t primary a Dem mayor like this.
You didn't speak to the part I said about money squeezing out certain candidates, who have the most experience to run this city, but not the money. Nothing about the race was more equitable than past races. I would think that would be the goal of folks who call themselves progressive.
I did reply to that, there’s a limit on how long each post is! Also noteworthy on this topic, when Zohran reached his limit on matching funds, he made a video telling his supporters to donate to other candidates like Adrienne Adams, because it was most important to beat Cuomo.
Your definition of progressives seems very white. Democrats despise Adams and you should know this already. No one wanted Cuomo to run or attach his name to NYC, and you should know this already.
Who do you mean by Democrats? When Eric Adams became mayor, people in the DNC were talking about him as the new face of the Democratic Party. They loved have a cop mayor that they could bring out to look tough on crime. My Dem congressman didn’t call for Eric Adams to resign when he was indicted.
Well who do you think the Democrats are? Who do you think the base is? Everyone I know wanted him gone. My congress person talked about it in a community meeting. No one I know voted for him until the general. Every person around me cheered when he was indicted.
I think you just hit the nail on the head of this initial conversation! There is seemingly a huge disconnect between the Democratic base in NYC and a lot (not all) of our leadership. That is why we are looking for the leaders to endorse Mamdani, even if that is a bit unusual in a mayoral election.
Everyone I know cheered for the indictments on Eric Adams; I don’t understand why Kathy Hochul let him keep his job and continue to be blatantly corrupt, when she could have fired him, and we could have had our wonderful city advocate as interim mayor.
No one needs to endorse him who normally wouldn't. It would be odd for someone who never endorses people to suddenly do it. Rank and file Democrats are loyal. They'll vote for him because he's the nominee, just like folks voted for Adams, DeBlasio, etc. Plus, no one really likes the alternatives.
I do agree that it doesn’t make much of a difference if they endorse or not, but it is likewise very upsetting to see some of them explicitly say that they have concerns about Mamdani, eg my rep Dan Goldman. They can endorse, or say nothing at all, but to then say something negative is not okay.
Publicly they should be quiet, and privately have their meetings and concerns, I agree. I think that way because I'm a rank and file Democrat, and I understand what the party needs to do to be successful. But let's be real, Democrats are going to vote for the nominee because that's who we are.
I will add: *NOBODY* WANTED CUOMO. He was a hold your nose candidate at best. I don’t see anyone trying to hold Mamdani down — it’s just, if he’s gonna win it on the base he has, let him win it. Are we not allowed to see how powerful that base is — if they show up to the polls? I’d like to.
Unfortunately Cuomo does have some people out there who still (or at least during the primary) legitimately think he is great; not a lot but they exist. Apparently these are the groups he still does well with, for whatever reasons,
Democrats don't vote against the Democratic nominee. It's that simple. The only way that would happen is if the nominee did something so egregious (and visible to the public), that the base turned against them. That's not happening here. Democrats close ranks like they always do in the general.
Agree, but there is going to be a lot of money being spent on behalf of Cuomo and Eric Adams to try to invent that backlash against Zohran, especially as we get closer to the election. And a lot of that PAC money will come from wealthy Democrats who don’t want their taxes to go up.
Again, rank and file Democrats vote for Democrats. If you have concerns, then they aren't about the Democratic base, who are loyal voters. They're about other folks. As for taxes, you know that's not a given, considering state laws. DeBlasio failed at that for that very reason.
Sure, but is that going to be enough to change a deep blue city overnight? They wasted their PAC money on the primary already. Mamdani will win. The donors can get on board or not.
That’s how I feel about it too - although I don’t live in NYC and I’m unsure why we all have to have an opinion about it 🙃 “No matter who” means no matter who. He won the primary fair & square & I support him. I don’t see why every national Dem needs to get involved in a regional election tho.
People need to decide if the DNC is so powerful and controls voters’ minds so much that endorsements from higher up make this much of a difference — or if they’re so weak & feeble that they must simply be challenged in primaries and we’ll have stronger candidates in the general. Which is it?
Most people have no idea what the DNC is, or what they do and don't do. They always think the DNC, DCCC, and DSCC are the same thing. Then they confuse all these three with local and state parties. But yeah, the expression "all politics is local" exists for a reason. It's consistently true.
I live here. 30% of NYers voted in the primary, per usual. The only ones who got any real attention on tv and print were the three at the top. They were heavily funded. The only time you saw the others was occasionally in an interview or debate. No one wanted Cuomo to run and Adams is despised.
I live here too, NYC born and bred; when I canvassed for Zohran at the St Patrick’s day parade in my neighborhood, we had around 30 volunteers show up, Lander had about 4 or 5. People came up asking to sign the form. I’ve never seen anything like it here.
But also, a lot of primary voters who do show up listen to the endorsements of eg the WFP, and they had a list of 4 candidates, with Mamdani and Lander as the top 2.
And it wasn’t just that Zohran had money to spend on ads, his funding came from a lot of small donors, many of whom were also volunteers. He went from polling at 1% to winning in less than five months.
My tv was flooded by 3 candidates. So was yours. You know which 3 you saw the most, until Landers started getting more attention. Others in the race were not even seen, despite some of their positions in local government. They weren't featured, and rarely interviewed.
Yeah but before Zohran had the money for a flood of ads in June, he needed to get that money in the preceding months. He had volunteers before he had donors. Lander already had a local base of donors. And it wasn’t like Cuomo where you had mega PACs spending millions.
But again, let's not pretend this race was different, it wasn't. The candidates who had the most money, got the most tv and print attention, made the top 3. Shocking.😒