Can “Democratic Socialist” Zohran Mamdani Really Win?

There’s an air of inevitability surrounding Zohran Mamdani’s bid to become New York City’s next mayor.  From an obscure long-shot just three months ago, he’s suddenly become not just the clear front-runner in the race, but the odds-on favorite to win. But with the balloting still almost three months away, and the post-Labor day campaign frenzy still to unfold, confident predictions of victory can be precarious – and for Mamdani, self-defeating. The polling thus far still favors the 33-year old upstart overall, and the continuing divisions among his three leading competitors, none of whom shows an inclination to drop out, gives Mamdani the upper hand. But he’s still commanding just over a third of the vote, an advantage that hasn’t budged much for weeks. And there are other warning signs, too.

One is that disgraced former governor Andrew Cuomo, is showing continuing strength in the Bronx, running neck-and-neck with Mamdani in the latest poll, each man garnering about a third of the borough’s voters, with Mayor Eric Adams, also severely tarnished by scandal, way back in third. The Bronx is the one borough where Cuomo outperformed Mamdani decisively during the Democrat primary, winning by 18 points, 54%-36%.  The main reason?  The African-American-vote, which still heavily favors Cuomo. The former governor clobbered Mamdani in the highest density African-American districts across the city, though Mamdani did win Black-dominated Harlem as part of his sweeping victory in Manhattan. Blacks constitute at least a quarter of city voters – and there’s a distinct age and generation gap. Older Blacks are heavily for Cuomo, younger Blacks tilting toward Mamdani. A big issue moving forward is whether Mamdani’s new outreach efforts to the Black community can narrow Cuomo’s lead. The signs are mixed.

Another potential warning sign is that Curtis Sliwa, the Republican dark horse, who ran and lost badly against Adams in the last mayoral race in 2021, is also starting to gain ground in crime-ridden Queens. His 18% of the vote there places him second to Mamdani, ahead of Cuomo and Adams, but insiders say it’s likely just the beginning of a Sliwa surge. While crime is down in the city overall, it’s sharply on the upswing in Queens, which is in the midst of a decade-long rape “crisis.”  Sliwa, who has long made crime and public safety his signature issue, is camping out in Queens, and he’s back riding the city’s subways two or more hours a day, the same tactic he used to great advantage to aggressively promote his citizen crime prevention group, the Guardian Angels, back in the 1970s and 80s.

Crime is a funny and unpredictable issue in New York – as it is elsewhere. Exaggerated fears of it – especially violent street crime – have often bolstered GOP election campaigns. But serious crime has declined steadily in New York as it has in much of the country –potentially a feather in the cap of Mayor Adams, a former cop, who oversaw the city’s crime-fighting success. To the extent that the Mayor retains any enduring  credibility and support – he’s barely in double-digits in most polls – it’s largely due to his claim to have kept New York streets safer during his tenure.   But Adams was also indicted for bribery and illegal campaign contributions in 2024, and only managed to escape prosecution and likely conviction (including jail time) due to a decision by President Trump to pardon him. Now he faces an even bigger and more damaging investigation of his alleged involvement in a high-level corruption scheme involving the top ranks of the NYPD. The city’s entire public safety system is under fire, and even Sliwa’s ability to exploit his legitimate crime fighting street cred might be hampered as a result. Sure the city needs more police officers, but the idea of “refunding” the NYPD amid growing doubts about the integrity of law enforcement may not be especially popular right now.

Of course, the big issue in the mayor’s race is still “affordability” – the one that Mamdani adroitly championed during the Democrat party primary to stir a deep chord among voters. Mamdani is continuing to trumpet the issue, giving him the edge in the current polling and forcing the other candidates – including, even Sliwa – to embrace it. Mamdani’s promise to freeze city rents and establish city-run grocery stores has been lampooned by conservatives – with some parroting Trump’s depiction of Mamdani as a “communist lunatic.” Various segments of the New York business community have been plotting to fund Super PACs for an all-out propaganda offensive against Mamdani, warning of an economic catastrophe to befall the city – including massive capital flight – should he win and try to implement his “radical” policies.  So far, the business elites seem as fragmented as the anti-Mamdani opposition, with little agreement on whether they should coalesce around a single candidate, and if so, which one. But an all-out smear campaign by the city’s billionaire class – with realtors and high-end supermarket owners in the forefront – could well take its toll, especially among wavering moderates still looking for a “safe” alternative.

Still, the big question is:  Other than anticommunist fear-mongering, what can Mamdani’s opponents hope to offer NYC’s angry and restless voters, especially youth, including Black youth, who are suffering historic rates of joblessness and feel increasingly hopeless about their future?

Like crime, “socialism” is something of a red herring in a die-hard Blue city like New York, where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans nearly 6-1.  Former Democrat mayor Bill DeBlasio, a staunch liberal, was often branded with the same “socialist” label, though his reform proposals fell far short of Mamdani’s. “Socialism” these days – thanks, in part to Bernie Sanders – is viewed by most U.S. voters as an American-style form of Swedish social democracy, with aggressive tax and spending policies aimed at narrowing income equality and ending the tyranny of corrupt “crony” capitalism. It’s especially popular among younger voters, even as growing numbers of them, especially young men, have tilted toward Trump and the GOP in recent elections. Those young voters were the driving force behind Mamdani’s primary victory in June, and they promise to play an outsized role in the balloting in November.

Consider, for a moment, the national polls: Some 42% of Millennials and Gen Z’ers voters expressed a favorable attitude toward socialism as far back as 2015, just as Sanders was coming to the fore, nationally, but the latest polls conducted in March of this year found that youth sympathy for “socialism” has mushroomed to 62% – in fact, fully a third of young voters say they would even support  “communism.” The upshot? Cuomo, Adams and Sliwa aren’t likely to make much headway with younger voters by bashing Mamdani as a “dangerous” radical. To many, including some disenchanted moderates, he’s an anti-establishment rebel, a thumb in the eye of the Big Banks, the city’s super-rich developers and the bought-off corrupt government officials like Adams that are making life unaffordable for millions.

Will a rent freeze actually help lower rents? In the short term, it will undoubtedly  keep them from rising, though the longer-term effects are unclear.  A freeze, depending on how it’s implemented, could well end up depleting the housing stock, as landlords rebel and start converting their units to condos or abandoning their buildings – and expensive maintenance and upkeep – altogether. And what will be the price and competitive effect of government-run grocery stores, assuming their creation is even feasible? No one knows for sure, but as with the rent freeze, the potential market effects may be less important to many voters than the sheer symbolism of the idea. Mamdani’s offering bold outside-the-box solutions while the tired political establishment dithers. For many depressed and down-and-out New Yorkers, and for youth seeking a generational champion, boldness alone may be good enough – at least for now.

So why is there still hope for Mamdani’s opposition – in a city – and state – so traditionally dominated by Democrats? In part, it’s because 1 in 5 NYC voters are unaffiliated. It’s also because even Democratic voters have been known to cross party lines. New York has had several GOP mayors in recent decades – Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg, come to mind – though to be sure, they were relative moderates elected at a time when voters were far less polarized. Sliwa, a fixture of New York politics for decades, is a maverick with no elective experience and he’s never fit the GOP party mold. But his bid this time may be the first in which he plans to invest heavily, with a real intent to win.

New York’s business elites are just now gearing up to raise funding for a “Stop Mamdani” offensive that will get underway in earnest early next month. While pressure is growing to try to force one of the leading opposition candidates – probably Adams – out of the race, his departure is highly unlikely, most insiders say. Cuomo, who wants to use his mayoral bid as a stepping stone to the White House, isn’t going anywhere, either. And Sliwa, who was clobbered by Adams in 2021 with just 28% of the vote, now sees himself as potentially the last man standing. He just obtained nearly $2 million in matching funds, more than any other candidate, including Cuomo. Long considered a gadfly by just about every city stakeholder – Adams regularly refers to Sliwa as a “buffoon” and the business community, whom Sliwa has lambasted in the past, remains suspicious – the 71-year old’s fledgling campaign could have some room to grow this time.

Still, the biggest wild card in the mayor’s race may well be what President Trump decides to do – or not do. Nearly everyone agrees that overt intervention, including an open endorsement of one of Mamdani’s opponents, would only backfire in Mamdani’s favor. Mamdani, who senses that his candidacy could face significant headwinds in the coming weeks, is already trying to turn the race into a referendum on Trump. Last week’s brouhaha in the New York Times over possible backroom conversations between Trump and Cuomo – which both men denied, convincing no one  – is suggestive of the mounting political stakes that the mayor’s race represents for both parties, and not just in New York.

Trump’s potential intervention – likely through back channel negotiations and deal-making – will further complicate whether or how senior Democrats – especially New York’s senior senator and party power-broker Chuck Schumer and the state’s governor Kathy Hochul –  decide to weigh in. Cuomo, unlike Adams, still enjoys considerable support inside his party, one reason he decided to stay in the race, despite losing the primary. Formally endorsing him over Mamdani – an endorsement that Cuomo desperately wants – is a dicey even unconscionable option – especially if it’s perceived as a tacit alliance with Trump to blunt the progressive surge inside the party – and indeed, nationwide. For the DNC, blocking the party’s own nominee, on ideological grounds, or for reasons of political expediency, could drive a permanent wedge between moderates and progressives. It could well mean the end of the party as we know it.

Another option, of course, is to bite the bullet and openly back Mamdani, which has the support of other top progressives like Elizabeth Warren as well as Sanders and AOC– but right now, it’s clearly anathema to the party leadership.  Hakeem Jeffries did agree to meet with Mamdani, more as a courtesy than anything else, while leading centrists like Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro have issued none-too-subtle public warnings to Mamdani that his views on Israel may be out of bounds – a clear shot across the bow, and a signal to other moderates to hold firm.

And finally, the party leadership, fear-stricken and confused, could decide to stay on the sidelines, playing wait-and-see, or worse, letting events – a possible new scandal, or surprise revelation – take their course. This is far from a safe option, however, especially if it’s perceived as undercutting Mamdani in the face of an escalating conservative business offensive. Imagine the backlash if the GOP’s Sliwa, clearly an underdog but quietly gathering steam, somehow manages to win?  Stranger things have happened, in New York and elsewhere. Is it really worth the risk?

Like it or not, progressives inside and outside the Democrat party are clearly surging and capturing the imagination of a broad swath of voters – especially Millennials and Gen-Zers, who’ve been flirting mightily with Trump and MAGA of late. Not backing this progressive surge may comfort moderates who fear that a radical “takeover” of the party will doom its prospects with conservative White swing voters in the heartland.  In Minnesota, Omar Fateh, a Mamdani-style progressive candidate, just won the Democratic primary in the mayor’s race in Minneapolis. Meanwhile, in Chicago, Brandon Johnson, who won his city’s top office two years ago, has come under severe criticism – even from fellow Democrats – for his alleged mishandling of municipal affairs, and may not survive politically. Moderate Democrats see this growing trend and worry that it may allow left-leaning candidates in diehard Blue cities to advance, but will ultimately backfire if voters come to perceive the Democrats as hostage to forces that cannot credibly forge the alliances needed to govern effectively.

But those fears are largely hypothetical, and they betray a lack of faith in the competence of the party’s emerging multicultural leadership, which is untested, but vibrant.  Historically, every Chicago or New York mayor, Republican or Democrat, has faced enormous challenges in governing a sprawling metropolis, as Mamdani surely will, if he wins. Look at the enormous challenges Adams has faced, which he clearly failed to meet,  opening the door to Mamdani (“If Aadams had done his job, we wouldn’t have to deal with Mamdani,” Sliwa notes).  Cuomo’s record as governor is also checkered –  and further marred by a deeply offensive sex scandal.  The real challenge facing the Democrat party – whose credibility with voters has plummeted to historic lows – is the perception that it lacks a forward-looking vision for the country, that it’s simply part of a corrupt and ineffectual establishment more interested in serving itself than the country. This perception is not limited to New York. Will voters back candidates like Mamdani – fresh young faces with the drive and energy to tackle festering problems forthrightly and honestly– in other local jurisdictions, given the options?  It remains to be seen, but there’s no reason to believe they won’t. It’s time to let the chips fall where they may.

The outcome of this high-stakes race over the future of political management of the world’s most important financial capital will likely prove consequential for years to come. For Democrats of all stripes, still languishing in their post November torpor, this is no time for hand-wringing. Obama was a risky bet, too, and look how that turned out. With any luck, a new zeitgeist could soon be on the horizon. Mamdani may not win, for a host of reasons, but if Democrats play their cards right, the party surely will.

The post Can “Democratic Socialist” Zohran Mamdani Really Win? appeared first on CounterPunch.org.