Democratic Party

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares89 Views

      in Elections

      Mamdani, Urged to Keep Tisch as Police Commissioner, Is Considering It

      by

      As Zohran Mamdani runs for mayor in the general election, some leaders are encouraging him to keep Jessica Tisch as New York City’s police commissioner.Zohran Mamdani, the front-runner to be the next mayor of New York, and Jessica Tisch, the city’s police commissioner, might not seem like natural allies.He is a democratic socialist who has questioned whether billionaires should exist. She is a billionaire heiress who has called for stricter criminal justice laws.But if Mr. Mamdani wins November’s general election, both appear open to working together — a potential partnership being pushed by influential business leaders and some of Mr. Mamdani’s more powerful Democratic allies.Mr. Mamdani, a state assemblyman who decisively won the Democratic primary last month, has said he would consider keeping Commissioner Tisch, and has praised her on the campaign trail and in private for improving public safety and running the Police Department more responsibly after the tumult of Mayor Eric Adams’s first term.Ms. Tisch, in turn, believes that she has made progress in making the city safer since taking command of the department seven months ago, and would want to stay in the job regardless of the outcome of the November election, according to two people familiar with her thinking.The leaders who have encouraged Mr. Mamdani to keep the commissioner include Letitia James, the state attorney general, according to a person familiar with the matter. Ms. James has enthusiastically endorsed 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

    • 75 Shares137 Views

      in Elections

      If Zohran Mamdani Wins, Then What?

      by

      Zohran Mamdani’s remarkable, decisive defeat of Andrew Cuomo in the New York Democratic primary for mayor opens a potential new path for progressive governance — one that will be a challenging, if thrilling, test for the American left.Mr. Mamdani, the 33-year-old state assemblyman and proud democratic socialist, is the heavy favorite to win the general election in November, even in a field that includes the beleaguered incumbent, Eric Adams, running as an independent. If he prevails, he will be, without a doubt, the most powerful unabashedly left-wing politician in America.That’s direct power: over America’s largest police force, its largest education department and a municipal budget that has soared past $110 billion. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders are famous and influential leftists, but they do not oversee the machinery of government in the way mayors do. And governing, unlike legislating, cannot simply default to activism.Mr. Mamdani would become the leftist others look to, either as a savior or as a villain.New York City has a larger population than most states; it is racially, ethnically and politically diverse. The deep-blue hue of its electorate belies a tremendous complexity that has deviled many a mayor. How to govern for progressive A.O.C. supporters and conservative Orthodox Jews? What about churchgoing African Americans, Muslim Middle Easterners and Sikhs? This is a city that less than a year ago saw a significant swing toward Donald Trump.Mr. Mamdani would face numerous tests. (A disclosure: In 2018, when I ran for state senator in New York City, Mr. Mamdani was my campaign manager.) With the city, the nation and even the world watching him, he would be tasked with fulfilling campaign promises that were widely popular. As mayor, he could freeze rent on rent-stabilized apartments, since the mayor appoints the members of the board that makes this decision. He could fund, through the municipal budget, the five city-run grocery stores in his campaign proposal, perhaps partnering with existing chains and subsidizing them to lower the cost of items there.But at least some of his proposals would not be immediately deliverable. He would need to barter with the state-run Metropolitan Transportation Authority — and by extension, Kathy Hochul, the moderate Democratic governor — for his proposal to make buses free, even if the overall cost (it would mean forgoing an estimated $800 million a year in fare revenue) is not terribly expensive, in the grand scheme of the city and state budgets, which total north of $100 billion and $200 billion, respectively.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

    • 100 Shares110 Views

      in Elections

      Musk’s Third Party Starts With a Good Idea

      by

      Elon Musk has finally done something predictable (for a gazillionaire with a political itch, that is): He says he’s launching a third party devoted to the cause of deficit reduction. Instead of the quadrennial dream of No Labels, in which high-minded donors put up the money for an imaginary white knight who never materializes, we may get the “America Party,” in which the world’s richest man puts his fortune behind, he says, “extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield.”If you parse Musk’s postings and re-postings, that seems to mean a third party strategy that targets a handful of close Senate and House seats, trying to create a legislative faction that exerts control over both bodies by preventing anything from passing without their crucial votes.Credit where due: This is a somewhat better plan than just backing a doomed third-party presidential bid in 2028. The most compelling suggestion for would-be third partyers during Joe Biden’s presidency was that they should persuade a clutch of discontented senators to caucus as independents, creating a potent Joe Manchin-Mitt Romney-Lisa Murkowski-Susan Collins-Kyrsten Sinema bloc. Musk’s concentrated-force idea, presumably, would be an attempt to create this kind of bloc from scratch, discovering the next Murkowskis and Manchins and making it possible for them to fund and win a race without an R or D beside their name.Before the travails of DOGE, I would have said that it was a mistake to automatically bet against Musk; now it seems safer to just acknowledge up front that this plan is unlikely to work out, and that Musk will probably find it too difficult to seriously pursue.But in the spirit of possibility, and because the House-and-Senate plan is an advance on most third-party fantasias, let’s consider the things that would need to happen for Musk to succeed.First, the America Party couldn’t just target the tightest swing states. You’ll notice that of the independent-minded senators and former senators listed above, only Sinema comes from a hotly contested state. That’s because under polarized conditions, a true swing state is usually the place where both parties make the strongest efforts at persuasion, where the stakes of each election seem highest and the fear of the other party’s rule is sharpest among partisans on either side.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

    • 113 Shares174 Views

      in Elections

      How Insularity Defined the Last Stages of Biden’s Career

      by

      Former President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s aides did not want him to speak with me.For months, as I worked on a book about the 2024 presidential election, I made multiple requests for an interview with Mr. Biden. One of my co-authors had sat down with President-elect Donald J. Trump, and we felt it was critical to talk to Mr. Biden. But the former president’s aides said he was working on a memoir, and that would conflict with my book.Yet when I reached Mr. Biden on his cellphone in late March, he answered and agreed to talk. He broke his silence on his successor to criticize the early weeks of Mr. Trump’s second term. “I don’t see anything he’s done that’s been productive,” the former president said.When I asked if he had any regrets about dropping out of the presidential race, Mr. Biden said, in a detached tone, “No, not now. I don’t spend a lot of time on regrets.” Then he hung up because he was boarding an Amtrak train.My brief conversation with Mr. Biden prompted a cascade of concern among his top aides. One screamed at me for calling the former president directly. Others texted furiously, trying to figure out how I had obtained Mr. Biden’s phone number.Mr. Biden had seemed open to continuing the conversation, but my subsequent calls went straight to voice mail. His automated greeting simply said, “Joe.”Two days later, that greeting was replaced by a message from Verizon Wireless: “The number you dialed has been changed, disconnected or is no longer in service.”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

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Book Review: ‘2024,’ by Josh Dawsey, Tyler Pager and Isaac Arnsdorf

      by

      “2024,” a campaign book by three seasoned political journalists, immerses readers in the chaos and ironies of the race for the White House.2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America, by Josh Dawsey, Tyler Pager and Isaac ArnsdorfIn “2024,” the latest 400-page dispatch from last year’s presidential contest, the authors, a trio of veteran journalists from different august papers — Josh Dawsey (The Wall Street Journal), Tyler Pager (The New York Times) and Isaac Arnsdorf (The Washington Post) — write that “there was a view popular among some political insiders that this election had been over before it was started.”The authors end up arguing that things were not so fated, but reading what they have to report, I couldn’t help feeling those political insiders had a point. In this account, Biden’s operation resembles its candidate: listless, semi-coherent, sleepwalking toward calamity. It exists for its own sake, impervious to outside input, pushed along by inertia alone. The Trump campaign — at least after his first indictment provides a burst of energy and purpose — appears driven, disciplined, capable of evaluating trade-offs and making tough decisions. Trump seems to want to win; Biden just wants to survive.Things do change when Kamala Harris enters the fray. She gives Trump a run for his money, but her campaign is held back from the start by the slow-moving disaster that made it necessary in the first place.“2024” is a well-paced, thorough and often (darkly) humorous account of the two-year campaign season that began when Donald Trump announced he was running for president again — at a Mar-a-Lago launch so disorganized and halfhearted, the authors write, that even sycophantic Trump allies admitted it was “a dud.”It is also perhaps the smelliest campaign book I can recall. Trump reflects on his future over fried shrimp and tartar sauce. A Biden aide picks at eggs and bacon in a lonely hotel restaurant. At a desultory Trump news conference in the summer of 2024, packages of sausage and gallons of milk are laid out as props to highlight rising food prices; flies circle the meat “spoiling in the August sun.”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

    • 125 Shares140 Views

      in Elections

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

      by

      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

    • 88 Shares162 Views

      in Elections

      Israel Is Fast Alienating the Democratic Base

      by

      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

    • 88 Shares115 Views

      in Elections

      Can Democrats Find Their Way on Immigration?

      by

      The Democrats onstage saw themselves as morally courageous. American voters, it turned out, saw a group of politicians hopelessly out of touch.Standing side by side at a primary debate in June 2019, nine of the party’s candidates for president were asked to raise their hand if they wanted to decriminalize illegal border crossings. Only one of them held still.Six years later, the party remains haunted by that tableau. It stands both as a vivid demonstration of a leftward policy shift on immigration that many prominent Democratic lawmakers and strategists now say they deeply regret, and as a marker of how sharply the country was moving in the other direction.Last year, 55 percent of Americans told Gallup that they supported a decrease in immigration, nearly twice as many as in 2020, and the first time since 2005 that a majority had said so. The embrace of a more punitive approach to illegal immigration includes not only white voters but also working-class Latinos, whose support Democrats had long courted with liberal border policies.“When you have the most Latino district in the country outside of Puerto Rico vote for Trump, that should be a wake-up call for the Democratic Party,” said Representative Vicente Gonzalez of Texas, who saw Mr. Trump win every county in his district along the border with Mexico. “This is a Democratic district that’s been blue for over a century.”The Trump administration is pursuing the harshest crackdown on immigrants since World War II, an effort many Democrats see as a national crisis.Gabriel V. Cárdenas for The New York TimesWe 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