More stories

  • in

    Mamdani Prepares to Meet With New York City’s Wary Business Leaders

    On Tuesday, Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist running for mayor, will meet with the who’s who of the corporate world as he prepares for the general election.In the weeks since Zohran Mamdani’s stunning victory in the Democratic mayoral primary, some corporate and finance leaders have predicted an exodus of wealthy investors from New York City. They have called him a Marxist and an out of touch idealist, and have warned of rough times ahead for the city if Mr. Mamdani, a democratic socialist, wins the general election in November.On Tuesday and Wednesday, leaders on Wall Street and across the business world will have an opportunity to confront Mr. Mamdani directly in meetings with the Partnership for New York City, a consortium of 350 members representing banks, law firms and corporations.The meetings were requested by Mr. Mamdani, a Queens assemblyman who says he wants to work with the business community. Mr. Mamdani has recently moderated some of his stances that have generated the most controversy as he shifts his focus to the general election. Tuesday’s meeting will take place behind closed doors with no news media present, and more than 100 executives are expected to attend.The Partnership’s board is a who’s who of powerful business leaders including Henry Kravis of KKR, Rob Speyer of Tishman Speyer and J.P. Morgan’s chief executive, Jamie Dimon, who last week publicly criticized Democrats for “falling all over themselves” to support Mr. Mamdani’s policies including city-run grocery stores and a rent freeze on rent-stabilized apartments. “There’s the same ideological mush that means nothing in the real world,” Mr. Dimon said at an event in Europe.But as much as corporate leaders express reservations about Mr. Mamdani’s left-leaning policies, some of them are taking a pragmatic approach to the upstart candidate, who is leading in polls.Kathryn Wylde, the Partnership’s chief executive who had a frosty relationship with the city’s last progressive mayor, Bill de Blasio, has been open to working with Mr. Mamdani.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Cuomo to Fight On in Mayor’s Race After Bruising Primary Loss to Mamdani

    Former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo announced he would run as a third-party candidate against Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor.Former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo has decided to run in the general election for mayor, urged on by supporters anxious that his withdrawal would nearly guarantee Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani’s victory and put New York City in the hands of the far left.The decision by Mr. Cuomo, who had been questioning whether to run after his crushing Democratic primary defeat by Mr. Mamdani, a state assemblyman and a democratic socialist, was announced Monday afternoon in a 90-second video.“I am truly sorry that I let you down. But as my grandfather used to say, when you get knocked down, learn the lesson and pick yourself back up and get in the game. And that is what I’m going to do,” Mr. Cuomo said. “The fight to save our city isn’t over.”Mr. Cuomo has pledged that if the polls show that he is not the highest-ranked challenger to Mr. Mamdani by mid-September, he will drop out of the race, according to a letter he sent to supporters.He will encourage Mr. Mamdani’s other challengers — Mayor Eric Adams, who is running as an independent; Curtis Sliwa, the Republican nominee; and Jim Walden, an independent — to do the same. Mr. Walden hatched the plan recently, and former Gov. David A. Paterson endorsed the idea last week.Mr. Cuomo was the prohibitive favorite for much of the Democratic primary for mayor, leading in most polls until the very end. A super PAC spent more than $22 million to promote his candidacy and launch a late-stage attack on Mr. Mamdani, once it became clear that he posed a threat to Mr. Cuomo.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    A Primer on Primaries for New Yorkers

    Should they be open or closed? In even years or odd? The mayor’s charter revision panel is considering shaking up the city’s voting system.Good morning. It’s Wednesday. Today we’ll look at how open primaries would work in New York City, as a special panel appointed by Mayor Eric Adams considers the idea.Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesNew York City’s mayoral race has certainly been eventful to say the least. After Zohran Mamdani’s primary win, some Democrats are strategizing to find ways to defeat him. And a city panel is considering overhauling the whole primary system. Let’s get into it.A special city panel appointed by Mayor Eric Adams is considering asking voters to approve an open primary system to allow those who aren’t registered with a party to vote in primary elections, according to my colleague Emma Fitzsimmons. The panel, a charter revision commission, released a 135-page report outlining the proposal, along with several others that could be on the ballot in November.New Yorkers may be wondering, what’s with all these changes?Ranked-choice voting came on the scene in 2021. If the panel places an open primary system on the ballot in November and voters approve it, it would take effect in 2029. Hold tight, there’s more. The charter commission is also considering moving elections to even years to align with presidential elections. If a majority of voters approve that proposal, it would require a change to the State Constitution.Right now, only New Yorkers who are registered as Democrat and Republican are able to vote in New York City primaries, and only in their party’s primary. The open primary would allow all registered voters to cast their ballots, and the top two candidates would battle it out in the general election.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    After Mamdani’s Win, Some Democrats Are Determined to Stop Him

    Though Zohran Mamdani scored a resounding victory in New York City’s Democratic primary, some in his own party are strategizing about how to defeat him in November.The race for mayor in New York City took an unusual and turbulent turn on Monday as some Democrats lined up to suggest ways to defeat Zohran Mamdani, the one candidate officially running on their party’s line.Former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and Mayor Eric Adams, two Democrats currently planning to run in the November election as independents, each called on the other to drop out.A third independent candidate, Jim Walden, was less specific in his similarly themed proposal last week. He suggested that a poll be taken in the fall to determine who among what he referred to as the four “free-market candidates” has the best chance of defeating Mr. Mamdani in a race that “pits capitalism against socialism.” Mr. Mamdani’s left-leaning platform and democratic socialist affiliation have alarmed some of the Democratic establishment.Whoever doesn’t win the poll, Mr. Walden said, should pledge to bow out and support the winner.Mr. Walden’s proposal was backed on Monday by Mr. Cuomo as well as former Gov. David A. Paterson, a Democrat who held a news conference to announce his support alongside the Republican billionaire John Catsimatidis and Sid Rosenberg, a radio host and supporter of President Trump.The underlying notion is that in a city where Democrats outnumber Republicans six to one, the only way to defeat Mr. Mamdani is for his challengers — the three independents and Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate — to consolidate their support behind just one of them, and avoid splitting the vote in a five-way race.In some ways, the calls for unity among the independent candidates echo the push that left-leaning groups made during the primary, when they urged supporters to lock arms in an effort to defeat Mr. Cuomo.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Israel Is Fast Alienating the Democratic Base

    To grasp the significance of Zohran Mamdani’s shocking victory in last month’s Democratic primary for mayor of New York, it’s worth recalling another upset, which took place 11 years ago and some 300 miles to the south, in a Republican congressional primary near Richmond, Va. In 2014 Dave Brat, a little-known economics professor at Randolph-Macon College, challenged Eric Cantor, who was then the House majority leader. Mr. Brat was outspent by a margin of more than 10 to one. Despite that, he won by 11 percentage points, thus becoming the first primary challenger to oust a House majority leader in American history.Ideologically, Mr. Brat and Mr. Mamdani have little in common. But they won their primaries for similar reasons: Each exploited the chasm between his party’s grass roots and its elites. In 2014 many Republican voters loathed the G.O.P. establishment. Today, many Democrats feel a similar fury toward the politicians who claim to represent them. In 2014 Mr. Brat used one issue in particular to illustrate that divide: immigration. Democratic alienation today is more nebulous. No single topic seems to loom as large as immigration did among Republicans a decade ago. Still, Mr. Mamdani’s victory illustrates the huge gulf between many ordinary Democrats and the Democratic establishment on one subject in particular: Israel.Mr. Mamdani focused his message on making New York City affordable. The campaign of the race’s presumed front-runner, Andrew Cuomo, in addition to attacking Mr. Mamdani as inexperienced and soft on crime, focused intensely on his opponent’s unapologetic commitment to Palestinian rights. That commitment was one reason that many political commentators and operatives assumed Mr. Mamdani, a young state assemblyman, could not win. They didn’t appreciate how broadly public opinion on this issue has changed.The shift has been national. In 2013, according to Gallup, Democrats sympathized with Israel over the Palestinians by a margin of 36 percentage points. Those numbers have now flipped, after more than a decade of nearly uninterrupted right-wing rule by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the rise to power of crude bigots like Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, and Israel’s mass slaughter and starvation of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip: This February, Gallup found that Democrats sympathize with Palestinians over Israel by a margin of 38 percentage points. According to a February survey by The Economist and YouGov, 46 percent of Democrats want the United States to reduce military aid to the Jewish state. Only 6 percent want to increase it, and 24 percent want it to remain at the level it is.These opinions aren’t restricted to young progressives. Older Democrats’ views have swung even more sharply than young ones against Israel in recent years. Between 2022 and 2025, according to the Pew Research Center, the percentage of Democrats age 50 and over with an unfavorable view of the Jewish state jumped a remarkable 23 percentage points. This shift has largely erased the party’s generation gap on the subject.Only one in three Democrats now views Israel favorably, according to Gallup. That makes Israel significantly less popular than Cuba, and only slightly more popular than China. Despite this, the party’s most powerful figures — from the minority leaders Senator Chuck Schumer and Representative Hakeem Jeffries to many of the Democrats likely to run for president in 2028 — oppose conditioning U.S. military support on Israel’s willingness to uphold human rights. This places them in clear conflict with their party’s base.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Zohran Mamdani Won by Listening. Democrats Should Try It.

    In the doldrums of last November, depressed and paralyzed by Donald Trump’s victory, I stumbled upon a video in my social media feed of an affable young man in a suit and tie, microphone in hand, interviewing voters in immigrant-heavy areas in Queens and the Bronx.“Did you get a chance to vote on Tuesday?” he asks. And then, “Who did you vote for?”Some didn’t vote at all. But many voted for Trump.What struck me about the video was the young man’s open-ended curiosity. Through it all, he simply listened to the responses to his questions, his friendly face inquisitive.Toward the end of the video he finally makes his pitch to a voter: “You know, we have a mayor’s race coming up next year, and if there was a candidate talking about freezing the rent, making buses free, making universal child care a reality — are those things that you’d support?”“Absolutely,” the man replies.New York Democrats did indeed embrace that message, vaulting that young man, Zohran Mamdani, who was as unknown to most New Yorkers as he was to me, to the top of the heap last month in the very crowded Democratic mayoral primary field. Like many people, I was resigned to an Andrew Cuomo romp, despite his odious past and his lazy campaign. Instead, we got an electrifying rout by a young, charismatic democratic socialist. When the final tally under ranked-choice voting was announced on Tuesday, Mamdani had won 56 percent of the vote, a 12-point margin on Cuomo, the heavy favorite.In the dizzying days since that stunning upset, there has been a great deal of hand-wringing about its meaning. Unsurprisingly, Republicans have had a racist freakout, portraying Mamdani, a Muslim who was born in Uganda to Indian-origin parents, as a dangerous jihadist who will impose Shariah law and invite the slaughter of Jewish New Yorkers. Without a trace of irony, they have also pilloried him as a godless Communist who will destroy the financial capital of the United States by seizing the means of production. Trump mused about arresting him.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Mamdani’s Win Has Put Buses in the Spotlight. Should They Be Free?

    The lowly New York City bus is getting new attention thanks to Zohran Mamdani’s vow to make the service free for all. But can free also mean fast?New York City buses are slow, often crowded and overshadowed by the subway. But thanks to a surprise role in the mayoral election campaign, the humble bus is suddenly in the spotlight.Zohran Mamdani, the Queens assemblyman who in the Democratic primary last week roundly defeated a crowded field that included former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, has vowed to make the city’s bus service — a network of 348 routes that carries 1.4 million passengers a day — free for all.The promise marks an unlikely star turn for a branch of the transit system that generally serves passengers who are older and poorer than those riding the subway. At Mr. Mamdani’s rallies about the high cost of rent and child care, the bus fare has become a symbol of the city’s affordability crisis, especially for residents of neighborhoods with limited access to trains.Nearly one in five New Yorkers said they struggled to pay for subway and bus fare in 2023, according to a report by Community Service Society of New York, an anti-poverty group. And the fare, currently $2.90 for both buses and subways, is expected to increase to around $3 early next year.Mr. Mamdani is now among the most high-profile supporters of the idea, popular among some left-leaning transit advocates, that the bus system should be treated as a tax-funded service like public schools and law enforcement.But the plan has split transit supporters who disagree on whether subsidizing the bus system is worth forgoing more than $800 million a year in fare revenue from bus riders, at a time when federal funds for New York State could prove unreliable. And for passengers who have stood in a packed bus, the concern is simpler still: Can free also mean fast?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    10 Ways of Making Sense of Zohran Mamdani’s Win

    Four years ago, when Eric Adams was elected mayor, New Yorkers were told that it marked the end of a progressive wave that had shaped national Democratic politics at least since the shock election of Donald Trump in 2016. Just five months ago, as Democrats reckoned with the meaning of a second loss to Trump, the refrain was similar: The party had been pulled too far left by its activist flank, which it needed to not just discipline but also perhaps disavow. At the time, Zohran Mamdani was registering just 1 percent support.Now he has won a decisive primary victory by bringing a remarkably novel electorate to the polls. And a lesson of his shock victory is one we probably should have learned several times over the past decade: Politics are fluid, even quicksilver, and the just-so stories we tell ourselves about what is possible and what is not are almost always simplistic and in many cases just plain wrong.New York is only one city, exceptional in many ways, and last week’s was just one election — a primary at that, featuring a front-runner burdened by laziness and a toxic past. And there are obvious reasons to think that the Mamdani playbook now being debated so furiously both by its admirers and by its detractors would not work in other parts of the country — at least, not in all of them. But Mamdani’s triumph is nevertheless, as I wrote a few weeks ago in anticipation, an extremely big deal, elevating an avowed leftist closer to a more consequential executive office than any has held in generations. And though Mamdani’s ascension comes with meaningful risks, it also throws open a whole new horizon of political possibility. Mamdani’s supporters are exhilarated by the fresh air. But the oxygen spent on him by his haters over the past week shows that they, too, think Mamdani’s win is a major national event.Last month, I asked what stories we might tell about a Mamdani victory — for the left, for the city and indeed for the whole country. But election night delivered enough of an earthquake that a number of new and important story lines have emerged since — too many, I think, to organize in any way but as a grab bag of observations. Here are 10.1. The American left has a new face, and New York City is now an extremely high-stakes progressive experiment.These days, with American politics more and more nationalized, every candidate everywhere is, to some extent, required to participate in national debates and be subjected to national scrutiny (on cable news and social media as well as offline). Perhaps in another era or another city an election like this could be cauterized from the national landscape, allowing an experiment in one city to play out on its own terms. Not now.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More