The Winter of Discontent for Zohran Mamdani Seems To Have Arrived A Couple Months Early

 

 

Living in New York City I have a more upfront view of Zohran Mamdani who in a very short time has becoming one of the most galvanizing and polarizing figures in American politics. I argued strongly his nomination and victory in the race for Mayor last year had far more to do with the weaknesses in the New York Democratic Party then any real desire for his politics. And I knew that his agenda was going to run into the brick wall that is the reality of governing the moment he took office.

It didn't take a genius to know that a 33 year old man who had managed a staff of five in his biggest job on the City Council was biting off far more than he could chew in a city where so many equally qualified men of both parties have tried and usually failed to be effective leaders. And like so many of the Justice Democrats of which he associated and the DSA of which he is a proud member his appeal was more due to his charisma and the idea that youth can succeed where age has failed. That this has nothing to do with being a good, elected official, much less mayor of one of the biggest and most complicated cities in America, did nothing to blunt his appeal to the young college educated (and overwhelmingly white) voters and there was enough resistance to putting Andrew Cuomo in to give him a victory and some grace.

The problem came as to how he chose to spend his political capital. When you're elected mayor you have a certain grace window to get your agenda through office. While the City Council and state officials like Governor Hochul might have conflicted opinions about their new mayor they were on the same team, as either fellow Democrats or fellow New Yorkers. Many of Mamdani's campaign promises might not have been able to get passed in their purist form but he could have used his political capital and the media to help get them done.

Instead he chose to spend most of his first six months in his office burning bridges with so many of the people who thought they were allies with him. This was by far the most clear when it came to the Congressional primaries this summer as I wrote last June:

Claire Valdez, another Democratic Socialist who was elected to the 37^th district in 2025 would attempt to run for New York 7^th to succeed Nydia Velasquez. She would be challenging Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso and Queens Councilwoman Julie Won. In the 13^th Darializa Avila Chevalier would be running to challenge Adriano Espaillat, who has represented the district since 2017 and is the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

Valdez and her chief competitor Antonio Reynoso agreed on everything: abolishing ICE, taxing the rich, Medicare for All and the War in Gaza. And considering Reynoso had early on endorsed Mamdani for Mayone one would have thought he would pick his colleague. Instead he chose Valdez who was, like him a fellow Democratic socialist.

Chevalier came under fire for deleted social media posts in which she bashed mainstream Democrats, questioned the view Israel had the right to exist and criticized Joe Biden leading up to the 2020 election.

Espaillat it's worth noting is one of the most progressive members of Congress, who has introduced bills to abolish the Death Penalty. He is a strong advocated for affordable housing and economic development, immigrant rights and the dream act, voted against passage of the Fiscal Responsibility Act

Chevalier is one of the most prominent anti-Gaza protestors who has been one of Mamdani's lead organizers so it was clear that this race would be a test of his endorsement powers as well as the Justice Democrats reach. Espaillat thought that Mamdani had his word to back him. Instead Mamdani chose to elevate Chevalier who like him was as vehement a critic on Israel as him.

This infuriated Hakeem Jeffries and Latino leaders. Considering that Chevalier and Valdez refused to commit to back him for House leader he is justifiably afraid that their victories could be turned into cudgels by Republicans in swing districts.

"Every Democrat in a competitive race will have to answer for our most extreme voices," said Howard Wolfson. "And it will make the party as a whole seem extreme and out of touch.

The results do seem to have worked in the short term: Valdez won her primary overwhelmingly and Chevalier narrowly defeated Espaillat. But yet again it demonstrates the inability of far left candidates like Mamdani to take anything but the immediate view. Already there are signs this has done much to hurt Mamdani's reputation at a state level. Many of the people who supported him early such as Velasquez are infuriated by how Mamdani seems more interested in putting it early supporters who are unknown in politics that may hurt the party. One can't escape the fact that Mamdani seems determined to remake the Democratic Party in New York in his image… (and) in Mamdani's case it seems the definition of pennywise gains in favor of pound foolish decisions state wide.

At this point it seems the national party's as well as those for New York Democrats were ill-founded: the party seems on the verge of taking both houses of Congress back and many of the swing district candidates such as Tom Suozzi, Laura Gillen and Cait Conley seem certain to win their races. And despite the increasingly frantic efforts of Republicans to use the brand of socialist on every Democrat running it is clear that its not playing the way it used.

 Furthermore after the narrow victory of Abdul El-Sayid in the Senate primary in Michigan and Francesca Hong's shocking defeat for Wisconsin governor to David Crowley – where polling in both states showed the left wing candidate with a  huge lead going into election day, many in the media are finally questioning where the left-wing agenda that Mamdani and the Justice Democrats have been trumpeting are as popular as with the electorate as has been believed. And when you combine in with the spectacular disaster that was Graham Platner senate campaign in Maine – who was looked for very much in the metric of a Mamdani type candidate – the Democratic leadership now has more than enough ammunition to argue that labeling candidates as 'the next Mamdani' is a loser.

So even before November the idea of Mamdani as a national figure had taken more than a few hits. And it didn't help that October has been a very bad month for Mamdani as; to use a very appropriate phrase, the left-wing chickens are coming home to roost.

The first real blow came, as you might have expected, last Wednesday, when after posting even a half-hearted statement against antisemitism Mamdani online Mamdani was torched by many of his strongest left-wing supporters for making a gesture that was at best symbolic, given his known position on Gaza. Then later that day when he attending a memorial held my many New York Jews the inevitable pro-Palestinian protest showed up and directed some of their harshest comments on him, calling him a traitor. The normally smiling Mayor is seen on footage all over the internet looking stone-faced if not ashen as he leaves the meeting.

Considering just how adamant Mamdani has been on his positions both on Palestine and Gaza that none of the protestors gave a second thought at cheering one of their biggest allies on the national stage should have been the clearest lesson of the transactional nature of the left in general. Many of them said they did it "to keep him honest." Translation: "What have you done for us lately?"

Furthermore in recent weeks Mamdani has been under pressure from his supporters and base, including the New York City chapter of the DSA to remove Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch. Last week  federal immigration officers shot and injured a man in the Bronx. This operation didn't involve the NYPD but nevertheless Chevalier appeared at a protest movement, getting into a violent confrontation aggressively pushing Chevalier to the ground.

To be clear Chevalier owes Mamdani for the fact she's likely going to be going to Congress this November. But she's made it clear she's more devote to the cause – or to be more accurate, gathering content for the cause – then any loyalty to her patron. She has demanded Tisch be removed because in her eyes Tisch is the enemy.

Earlier this week Mamdani also said he was committed to disband the NYPD's  Strategic Response group, which is established to handle counter-terrorism operations, active shooters and city wide mobilizations for major public disorder. As you suspect the left is more upset about that last part, as major public disorder is the left's stock and trade. And considering how many members of the DSA consider any action against a protest as a deliberate suppression of free speech and since you can never push back against the left in an argument, much less when they are causing disorder it was inevitable that they would demand that this unit be dissolved.

Mamdani and Tisch are ideologically opposed but so far during the first ten months of his administration they have managed to keep a working relationship that has helped delivered some of the lowest crime rates in the city's history. Crime is a major issue to most people in New York. To people like Chevalier, who think that some crimes are justifiable because of white supremacy, Mamdani no doubt was supposed to have his first budget defund it.

One of Mamdani's promises was that he was going to reshape the police department by shifting some responsibilities from officers to teams of social workers. Indeed he initially envisioned a $1 billion per year agency to dispatch civilian workers. Instead he launched a new office which had just two staff members and few immediate plans to shift the city's approach to 911 calls. There was neither enough funding nor support for the policy in the  city's budget.

As you'd expect Mamdani was immediately attacked by the president of the Police Union who argued that "the mayor's radical base wants a wholesale dismantling of the NYPD and its clear this announcement is an attempt to appease them." There's a certain truth to that, as well as the statement: "It won't work." Mamdani learned this last week but he's still trying. It's a waste of time.

What Mamdani is learning is the exact lesson multiple Republican house leaders have had to learn over and over (and over) and that Pelosi and Jeffries learned during Biden's administration: the most extreme members of your own party don't feel they owe loyalty to anyone in the leadership. In Mamdani's case it has to cut even deeper: he used his own political capital to lift Chevalier into Congress and she didn't even have the courtesy to wait until she was elected to turn on him.

It's not like Chevalier has any real interest of being a good representative either: it's clear she's auditioning to be the kind of scary left wing socialist Fox News says all Democrats are. (Now that Jasmine Crockett is a lame duck and AOC is getting a bit older I'll admit theirs an opening for that position.) One hopes that if the majority is sizable enough that the influence of members like Chevalier and Valdez will be limited at best.

The more practical lesson is that Mamdani's power as a kingmaker in New York politics may been tarnished. Being able to make political careers only works if those you mint answer to you when you call on them.  Say what you will about Trump (and many have) at the height of his political power he had a lock on the loyalty of those Congressman and senators he gave rise too. They did what he said when he said it and when they were no longer useful to him he had them disposed of.

Mamdani either doesn't have or is unwilling to use that same power to control those such as Chevalier. And since he is no better at controlling them its unlikely he'll able to use it to flex against other candidates in 2028.  If he had wants to primary Jeffries (as in fact he was considering earlier this cycle before dropping it) he will have to deal with the reality then those he choose to knight owe him know loyalty as well as the fact that both New York and national Democrats now see him as part of the problem and will be prepared to take action should he try this play again.

The gospel according to organization like the DSA has always been that if a candidate goes to the center, either when running in a general election or after winning office while governing, they are in fact going to the right. That is the justification that for decades they have chosen to label successful Democrats such as Clinton or Obama "neoliberals" and labeled moderate Democrats such as Joe Manchin or Krysten Sinema, DINOS. This has played out most recently in John Fetterman's tenure as Senator and there are signs the left has begun to turn on the more recently elected Ruben Gallego for working with Republicans as well.

The implication, never stated directly, is that a genuine left-wing candidate could not only run as a leftist but govern as one. And since left-wing candidates almost always lose in statewide elections as well most Congressional primaries it was one that they never had to test. Mamdani's victory in 2025 was the first real chance the far left has ever had to prove that it was possible to follow their own doctrine. I have little doubt Mamdani himself believed he could do so.

What his first year in office has proven is that governing has a centrist bias and the warmth of collectivism will always be chilled by the reality of money and politics. Mamdani has spent most of his first year in office doing everything possible to try and keep what got him there – mostly using social media and press opportunities – to make it seem like he was doing everything he promised. That he was isolating the power structure of New York at every turn as well as doing nothing to win over constituents who hadn't voted for him – as well as those who thought his candidacy was dangerous – was irrelevant to him; it seemed more important that not try to triangulate the right or the center then to actually get things done.

He may become a successful or at least competent mayor of New York City but it is clear given the last few weeks that his juggling act has instead pissed off everybody and he has gotten no grace from even those who should by any logic have some measure of fealty to him.  That he seems more interested in trying to appease those who are still deluded on how government should work and are most interested in burning the whole thing done – even as they prepare to take national office – then trying to move to the center shows where his priorities are.

It would hardly stun me if Mamdani were primaried himself in 2029, perhaps from the right, definitely from the left.  That this was the exact fate of his predecessor is an irony that he would hardly appreciate but I suspect many New Yorkers, moderates and the Democratic establishment itself would enjoy. He'll still be a figure the right will use to scare working class Americans into voting Republican for the foreseeable future.  The sad part is that I suspect within a short time many of the people he endorsed will be calling him the worst name possible: a neoliberal. That they themselves will likely remain the fringe element they have always been is something they will never see – but that Democrats really have to.