All posts tagged "new york city"

This Trump bromance was strangely heartening — but don't count on it lasting

Across the political spectrum — with alarm on the right and delight on the left — the display of warmth from President Trump toward Zohran Mamdani last Friday set off shock waves. Trump’s lavish praise of New York’s mayor-elect in the Oval Office was a 180-degree turn from his condemnation of the democratic socialist as “a pure true communist” and “a total nut job.” The stunning about-face made for a great political drama. But what does it portend?

Trump and his MAGA followers are hardly going to forsake their standard mix of bigotry, anti-immigrant mania and other political toxins. Demagoguery fuels the Republican engine — and in the 11 months until the midterm elections, skullduggery to thwart democracy will accelerate rather than slow down.

While countless media outlets have marveled at the appearance of a sudden Trump-Mamdani “bromance,” the spectacle has rekindled hopes that America can become less polarized and find more common ground. But what kind of common ground can — or should — be found with the leader of today’s fascistic GOP?

It’s true that Mamdani has a huge stake in diverting the Trump bull from goring New York. Billions of dollars are at stake in federal aid to the city. And the metropolis would be thrown into a chaotic crisis if Trump goes ahead with his threats to send in federal troops. Mamdani seems to have deftly prevented such repressive actions against his city, at least for a while.

Understandably, Mamdani’s main concern is his upcoming responsibility for New York City and its 8.5 million residents. But important as the Big Apple is, Trump’s draconian and dictatorial orders nationwide are at stake. It’s unclear that the chemistry between the two leaders will do anything at all to help protect immigrants in Chicago or Los Angeles or anywhere else in the country.

The president’s accolades for a leftist certainly confounded the perennial left-bashers at Fox News and many other right-wing outlets. Such discombobulation among pro-MAGA media operatives has been a pleasure to behold. But there’s more than a wisp of wishful thinking in the air from progressives eager to believe that Trump’s effusive statements about Mamdani, an avowed socialist, will help to legitimize socialism for the U.S. public.

Trump’s widely reported and astonishing turnaround about Mamdani might cause some Americans to reconsider their anti-left reflexes. But it’s also plausible that ripple effects of the episode could help to legitimize, in some people’s eyes, Trump’s leadership even while it continues to inflict horrific policies and anti-democratic politics on the United States. Gracious and avuncular performances by despots are nothing new. Neither are cosmetics on the face of a fascist.

A hazard is that the image of Trump as a tolerant and open-minded leader, in convivial discourse with New York’s progressive leader, could undercut the solid accusations that Trump is imposing tyrannical policies on America. Just a day before he met with Mamdani, the president publicly suggested the execution of several Democrats in Congress.

The most publicized few seconds of the Trump-Mamdani session with reporters was when a journalist asked about Mamdani’s past charge that Trump is a fascist. The interchange was widely reported as an amusing moment.

The danger of normalizing autocracy is heightened when the utterly serious appraisal of Trump as a fascist can be recast as a media punchline.

Over the weekend, Mamdani stood his ground during an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press, pointing out that in the Oval Office he had said “yes” to the reporter’s question about Trump being a fascist. And he added, “Everything that I’ve said in the past, I continue to believe.”

How long Mamdani will remain in Trump’s good graces is anyone’s guess. No doubt the mayor-elect is fully aware that Trump could turn on him with a vengeance. If Trump can do that to one of his most loyal ideological fighters, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, as he did recently, he can certainly do it to Mamdani.

To call Trump “mercurial” is a vast understatement. And yet, in countless ways, with rhetoric and with the power of the presidency, he has been unwavering and consistent — as immigrants being terrorized by ICE agents, or single mothers trying to feed their families, know all too well. Given all the harm his policies are doing every minute, it would be unwise to take seriously Trump’s broken-clock pronouncements that are occasionally accurate and decent.

Democratic socialists don’t need Trump’s approval. We need to defeat his MAGA forces. It’s unclear whether what happened with him and Mamdani in the Oval Office will make that defeat any more likely.

None of this is a criticism of Zohran Mamdani. This is an assessment of how the follow-up to his Oval Office drama with Trump could go sideways.

Trump and Mamdani found each other newly useful last Friday. Only later will we know who was more effectively using whom.

It’s all well and good to laud Mamdani’s extraordinary political talents and inspiring leadership for social justice. At the same time, we should recognize that he has entered into an embrace with a viperous president.

And when a rattlesnake purrs, it’s still a rattlesnake.

I've found the secret sauce for Democrats to win back power

Rather than belabor you today with the latest Trump outrages, I want to share with you conclusions I’ve drawn from my conversation yesterday with Zohran Mamdani (you can find it here and at the bottom of this piece) about why he has a very good chance of being elected mayor of New York City on Tuesday.

He has five qualities that I believe are likely to succeed in almost any political race across America today. If a 34-year-old state assemblyman representing Astoria, Queens, who was born in Uganda and calls himself a democratic socialist, can get this far and likely win, others can as well — but they have to understand and be capable of utilizing his secret sauce.

Here are the five ingredients:

  1. Authenticity. Mamdani is the real thing. He’s not trying to be someone other than who he is, and the person he is comes through clear as a bell. I’ve been around politicians for most of my life (even ran once for governor of Massachusetts) and have seen some who are slick, some who are clever, some who are witty, some who are stiff, but rarely have I come across someone with as much authenticity as Mamdani. Authenticity is the single most important quality voters are looking for now: someone who is genuine. Who’s trustworthy because they project credibility and solidity. Whose passion feels grounded in reality.
  2. Concern for average working people. Mamdani isn’t a policy wonk who spouts 10-point plans that cause people’s eyes to glaze over. Nor is he indifferent to policy. Listen to his answers to my questions and you’ll hear a lot about the needs of average working people. That’s his entire focus. Many politicians say they’re on the side of average working people, but Mamdani has specific ideas for making New York City more affordable. I’m not sure they’ll all work, but I’m sure voters are responding to him in part because his focus is indisputable and his ideas are clear and understandable.
  3. Willingness to take on the powerful and the wealthy. He doesn’t hesitate to say he’ll raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for what average working people need. You might think this would be standard fare for Democrats, but it’s not. These days, many are scared to propose anything like this for fear they’ll lose campaign funding from big corporations and the rich. But Mamdani’s campaign isn’t being financed by big corporations or the rich. Because of New York City’s nearly four-decade-old clean elections system that matches small-dollar donations with public money, Mamdani has had nearly $13 million of government funds to run a campaign against tens of millions of dollars that corporate and Wall Street Democrats — and plenty of Republicans — have spent to boost Democratic former governor Andrew Cuomo. We need such public financing across the nation.
  4. Inspiration. Many people are inspired by Mamdani. Over 90,000 New Yorkers are now going door-to-door canvassing for him (including my 17-year-old granddaughter). Why is he so inspiring? Again, watch our conversation. It’s not only his authenticity but also his energy, his good-heartedness, and his optimism. At a time when so many of us are drenched in the daily darkness of Trump, Mamdani’s positivity feels like sunshine. It lifts one up. It makes politics almost joyful. He gives it a purpose and meaning that causes people to want to be involved.
  5. Cheerfulness. Which brings me to the fifth quality that has made this improbable candidate into a front-runner: his remarkable cheerfulness. Watch his face during our discussion. He smiled or laughed much of the time. This wasn’t empty-headed euphoria or “morning in America” campaign rubbish. It’s directly connected to a thoughtfulness that’s rare in a politician, especially one nearing the end of a campaign — who’s had to answer the same questions hundreds if not thousands of times. He exudes a buoyancy and hope that’s infectious. It’s the opposite of the scowling Trump. It is what Americans want and need, especially now.

There’s obviously much more to it, but I think these five qualities — authenticity, a focus on the needs of average working families, a willingness to take on the rich and powerful in order to pay for what average working families need, the capacity to inspire, and a cheerfulness and buoyancy — will win elections, not only in New York City but across America.

Mamdani hasn’t won yet, and New York’s Democratic establishment is doing whatever it can to stop him (Michael Bloomberg, New York City’s billionaire former mayor, just put $1.5 million into a super PAC supporting Cuomo’s bid and urged New Yorkers to vote for Cuomo).

If Mamdani wins, his success should be a lesson for all progressives and all Democrats across America.

- YouTube www.youtube.com


  • Robert Reich is a professor of public policy at Berkeley and former secretary of labor. His writings can be found at https://robertreich.substack.com/.
  • Robert Reich's new memoir, Coming Up Short, can be found wherever you buy books. You can also support local bookstores nationally by ordering the book at bookshop.org.

I've seen the future of the Democratic Party — it isn't in the political center

The only upside to living through this dark time is it pushes us to rethink and perhaps totally remake things we once thought immutable.

Like the Democratic Party.

In case you hadn’t noticed, the current Democratic Party is dysfunctional if not dead.

Better dysfunctional than a fascist cult like the Trump Republican Party. But if there was ever a time when America needed a strong, vibrant Democratic Party, it’s now. And we don’t have one.

The brightest light in the Democratic Party is Zohran Mamdani, the 34-year-old member of the New York State Assembly who has a good chance of being elected the next mayor of New York City when New Yorkers go to the polls a week from Tuesday.

Mamdani is talking about what matters to most voters — the cost living. He says New York should be affordable to everyone.

He’s addressing the problems New Yorkers discuss over their kitchen tables. He’s not debating “Trumpism” or “capitalism” or “Democratic socialism.” He’s not offering a typical Democratic “10-point plan” with refundable tax credits that no one understands.

He’s proposing a few easy-to-understand things — free buses, free childcare, a four-year rent freeze for some two million residents, and a $30 minimum wage. He’s aiming to do what Franklin D. Roosevelt did in the 1930s: fix it.

You may not agree with all his proposals (I don’t) but they’re understandable. And if they don’t work, I expect that, like FDR, he’ll try something else.

The clincher for me is he’s inspiring a new generation of young people. He’s got them excited about politics. (My 17-year-old granddaughter is spending her weekends knocking on doors for him, as are her friends.)

Name a Republican politician who’s inspiring young people. Hell, I have a hard time coming up with a Republican politician since Teddy Roosevelt who has inspired young people.

You don’t have to reach too far back in history to find Democratic politicians who have inspired young people. Bernie Sanders (technically an Independent) and AOC. Barack Obama. (I was inspired in my youth by Bobby Kennedy — the real Bobby Kennedy — and Sen. Eugene McCarthy.)

And Zohran.

What do all of them have in common? They’re authentic. They’re passionate. They care about real people. They want to make America fairer. They advocate practical solutions that people can understand.

Nonetheless, Mamdani is horrifying the leaders of the Democratic Party. Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries haven’t endorsed him. Hillary Clinton has endorsed Andrew Cuomo, who’s spending what are likely to be the last days of his political career indulging in the kind of racist, Islamophobic attacks we’d expect from Trump.

Meanwhile, the editorial board of the New York Times counsels “moderation,” urging Democratic candidates to move to the “center.” Tell me: Where’s the center between democracy and fascism, and why would anyone want to go there?

In truth, the Times’s so-called “moderate center” is code for corporate Democrats using gobs of money to pursue culturally-conservative “swing” voters — which is what the Democratic Party has been doing for decades.

This is part of the reason America got Donald Trump. Corporate Democrats took the Party’s away from its real mission — to lift up the working class and lower middle class, and help the poor. Instead, they pushed for globalization, privatization, and the deregulation of Wall Street. They became Republican-Lite.

In 2016 and again in 2024, working and lower-middle class voters saw this and opted for a squalid real estate developer who at least sounded like he was on their side. He wasn’t and still isn’t — he’s on the side of the billionaires to whom he gave two whopping tax cuts. But if the choice is between someone who sounds like he’s on your side and someone who sounds like a traditional politician, guess who wins?

Trump also fed voters red-meat cultural populism — blaming their problems on immigrants, Latinos, Black people, transgender people, bureaucrats, and “coastal elites.” Democrats gave voters incomprehensible 10-point plans.

The Times tries to buttress its argument that Democrats should move to the “center” by citing Democrats who won election last year in places Trump also won.

But that argument is bunk. Democrats won in these places by imitating Trump. One mocked the term “Latinx” and was hawkish on immigration. Two wanted to crack down harder on illegal immigration. Two others emphasized crime and public safety. Another bragged about taking on federal bureaucrats.

This isn’t the way forward for Democrats. Red-meat cultural populism doesn’t fill hungry bellies or pay impatient landlords or help with utility bills.

Mamdani poses a particular threat to New York’s corporate Democrats because he wants to tax the wealthy to pay for his plan to make New York more affordable to people who aren’t wealthy.

He aims to generate $9 billion in new tax revenue by raising taxes on the city’s wealthiest residents and businesses. He’s calling for a 2 percent tax on incomes over $1 million, which would produce $4 billion in tax revenue. He wants to increase the state’s corporate tax rate to 11.5 percent to match New Jersey’s, generating about $5 billion annually.

He’s right. The wealthy have never been as wealthy as they are now, while the tax rate they pay hasn’t been as low in living memory.

Inequalities of income and wealth are at record levels. A handful of billionaires now control almost every facet of the United States government and the U.S. economy.

Even as the stock market continues to hit new highs, working class and lower middle class families across America are getting shafted. Wages are nearly stagnant, prices are rising. Monopolies control food processing, housing, technology, oil and gas.

The time is made for the Democrats. If the Party stands for anything, it should be the growing needs of bottom 90 percent — for affordable groceries, housing, and childcare. For higher wages and better working conditions. For paid family leave. For busting up monopolies that keep prices high. For making it easier to form and join labor unions.

Pay for this by raising taxes on the wealthy. Get big money out of politics.

This dark time should wake us up to the bankruptcy of the corporate Democratic Party.

It should mark the birth of the people’s Democratic Party. Zohran and others like him are its future.

  • Robert Reich is a professor of public policy at Berkeley and former secretary of labor. His writings can be found at https://robertreich.substack.com/.
  • Robert Reich's new memoir, Coming Up Short, can be found wherever you buy books. You can also support local bookstores nationally by ordering the book at bookshop.org.

'Republicans are losing their crap!' Ex-RNC chair laughs over GOP's new bogeyman

A former GOP insider laughed Thursday about how "Republicans are losing their crap" over the new conservative bogeyman: Zohran Mamdani.

Michael Steele, MSNBC host, former Republican National Committee chair, and former lieutenant governor of Maryland, described the Republican reaction to Mamdani's run for New York City mayor and told MSNBC's Chris Jansing that this isn't just a local race — it has national impact — following pro-Trump billionaire Bill Ackman's $1 million donation to Defend NYC, an anti-Mamdani super PAC.

"This is a municipal race. Yeah, New York City is a big deal in the scheme of other cities, I guess. But the reality remains, the fact that you've got, you know, millions of dollars flowing in from, you know, these third-party sources that Republicans seem to be losing their crap over," Steele said, laughing. "And saying all these things about him says more about the man himself running than the city, the race. It is about the fact that he comes outside of the political system."

Steele commented about how the election reminds him of other political candidates who have campaigned against the status quo.

"The thinking is it's easy to demagogue against him and demonize him as something that he may or may not be. You know, 'he's a communist.' 'He's a socialist.' 'He's outside the order of things.' And the interesting thing about that, the order is being itself deconstructed by Donald Trump. The order of things is being upended by the very man and his allies, who seemingly want to go after the guy who is outside the system. So I find that to be very, very intriguing in that regard," Steele added.

He argued that reality will settle in after the election, regardless of who wins.

"Look, at the end of the day, if he wins, he's going to have to do like every other mayor of New York. And that is figure out how to govern the things that he's proposed and says he wants, while he's saying he wants to cut the cost — cost money," he said. "So you know that's the reality that New Yorkers are having to deal with and how they balance that. Everybody else is trying to inject themselves into a race that at the end of the day, is going to fit within the order of things, even though the players outside the system, Donald Trump et al, are themselves trying to disrupt that order."

Voters will ultimately decide, and Mamdani will have to seek answers to resolving tough problems.

"Campaigning is one thing," Steele argued. "The reality of Mamdani is he's offering a pathway that's different and that's good. That's refreshing. I'd like to see him close the deal and reconcile the 'free' with the price tag that's awaiting, whether it's healthcare, grocery stores, whatever it is, is on his agenda."

This despicable move just exposed what really drives Trump

In 1989, Donald Trump purchased full-page ads in four New York newspapers, including the New York Times, calling for the return of the death penalty after a white jogger was brutally attacked in Central Park. Five Black and Latino teens were arrested for the assault, and, after confessions later determined to have been coerced by the police, they were convicted, even though there was no physical evidence linking any of them to the crime.

In 2002, after the five young men had spent years in prison for a crime they did not commit, their convictions were vacated when DNA evidence linked a serial rapist, Matias Reyes, to the crime. Reyes ultimately confessed, and provided an accounting of the crime that matched details prosecutors already knew, and forensics confirmed he had acted alone.

After the crime was solved, the case became symbolic for systemic injustice, police brutality, and racial profiling. Trump never apologized to the five men, and has never acknowledged what would have happened to them had his death penalty campaign succeeded.

He wants to hate

Trump’s vitriol has percolated in the intervening decades since the Central Park Five. After his full-page ads claimed “roving bands of wild criminals” were controlling NYC streets in 1989, this week he claimed “roving mobs of wild youth” were terrorizing streets in D.C.

Again using inaccurate claims to portray soaring violence, Trump announced on Monday that he was deploying the National Guard and federalizing the D.C. police department in order to rein in “complete and total lawlessness.”

Trump’s falsified charts with selectively outdated D.C. crime statistics were so patently wrong he was factchecked by the BBC, NPR, NYT, PBS and the Justice Department, whose data show that violent crime in Washington is at a 30-year low.

Trump’s addiction to hate and division, promoted through falsehoods, has persisted since the Central Park crime. When then-Mayor Ed Koch called for public healing, seeking to unite rather than divide his city, Trump wasn’t having it. His ad shot back, “"Maybe hate is what we need… I want to hate these muggers and murderers... They should be forced to suffer … Yes, Mayor Koch, I want to hate these murderers and I always will…”

Trump has been true to his word at least on this, and has continued ratcheting up false portrayals of dystopian urban hellscapes riddled with crime. Experts have shown a link between Trump’s language, trickle-down racism, and an increase in hate crime.

Support for police brutality

Trump’s early death penalty ads also revealed his thirst for police brutality. He wrote in 1989 that police should be “unshackled” from the constant threat of being called to account for “police brutality,” a sentiment he has echoed ever since:

The problem with getting “tougher” on crime, without addressing community needs, is that it doesn’t work, and often leads to an increase in crime.

Trump’s ineptitude also undermines police accountability efforts, further eroding trust between police and communities. By encouraging police to use excessive force, Trump spreads distrust of police among the public, needlessly endangering the lives of both citizens and police officers.

He may get the violence he craves

It is widely assumed that Trump is using D.C. as a test run for the federal occupation of other Democratic-led cities. During the George Floyd protests in the summer of 2020, when Trump still had adults in the room to advise him, Trump also wanted to “take over” D.C., but officials warned that such a heavy-handed approach could backfire. This year, in the absence of competent advisors, Trump is indulging his most dangerous impulses.

We now know that, aside from the D.C. “takeover,” Trump is developing a National Guard “strike force” to confront and quell protests, demonstrations, and civil dissent. This “strike force” will act as Trump’s personal militia to crush constitutionally protected speech, in Democratic-run cities, located in Democratic-run states.

Setting aside the glaring unconstitutionality of his plan, military service members aren’t trained to de-escalate tensions, manage crowds, or solve crimes. They are trained to kill. That is why the Posse Comitatus Act forbids using military forces against civilian populations, except in cases of rebellion or insurrection.

The purpose of Trump’s “takeover” of Washington D.C. isn’t to address escalating crime, because D.C. crime isn’t escalating. It isn’t to deal with potholes, beautification, or anything else Trump mentioned in his incoherent August 11 press conference.

Trump is “taking over” D.C., sending in federal troops just as he did in Los Angeles, to normalize an expanded police state. He hopes to keep control of D.C. until it’s time for a J6 rerun, as he scales his 1989 declaration of hate, control, and brutality nationwide.

  • Sabrina Haake is a columnist and 25+ year federal trial attorney specializing in 1st and 14th A defense. Her Substack, The Haake Take, is free

It can happen here, to Zohran

By James N. Gregory, Professor of History, University of Washington.

It has happened before: an upset victory by a democratic socialist in an important primary election after an extraordinary grassroots campaign.

In the summer of 1934, Upton Sinclair earned the kind of headlines that greeted Zohran Mamdani’s primary victory on June 24, 2025, in the New York City mayoral election.

Mamdani’s win surprised nearly everyone. Not just because he beat the heavily favored former governor Andrew Cuomo, but because he did so by a large margin. Because he did so with a unique coalition, and because his Muslim identity and membership in the Democratic Socialists of America should have, in conventional political thinking, made victory impossible.

This sounds familiar, at least to historians like me. Upton Sinclair, the famous author and a socialist for most of his life, ran for governor in California in 1934 and won the Democratic primary election with a radical plan that he called End Poverty in California, or EPIC.

The news traveled the globe and set off intense speculation about the future of California, where Sinclair was then expected to win the general election. His primary victory also generated theories about the future of the Democratic Party, where this turn toward radicalism might complicate the policies of the Democratic administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

What happened next may concern Mamdani supporters. Business and media elites mounted a campaign of fear that put Sinclair on the defensive. Meanwhile, conservative Democrats defected, and a third candidate split progressive votes.

In the November election, Sinclair lost decisively to incumbent Gov. Frank Merriam, who would have stood less chance against a conventional Democrat.

As a historian of American radicalism, I have written extensively about Sinclair’s EPIC movement, and I direct an online project that includes detailed accounts of the campaign and copies of campaign materials.

Upton’s 1934 campaign initiated the on-again, off-again influence of radicals in the Democratic Party and illustrates some of the potential dynamics of that relationship, which, almost 100 years later, may be relevant to Mamdani in the coming months.

California, 1934

Sinclair launched his gubernatorial campaign in late 1933, hoping to make a difference but not expecting to win. California remained mired in the Great Depression. The unemployment rate had been estimated at 29% when Roosevelt took office in March and had improved only slightly since then.

Sinclair’s Socialist Party had failed badly in the 1932 presidential election as Democrat Roosevelt swept to victory. Those poor results included California, where the Democratic Party had been an afterthought for more than three decades.

Sinclair decided that it was time to see what could be accomplished by radicals working within that party.

Reregistering as a Democrat, he dashed off a 64-page pamphlet with the futuristic title I, Governor of California and How I Ended Poverty. It detailed his plan to solve California’s massive unemployment crisis by having the state take over idle farms and factories and turn them into cooperatives dedicated to “production for use” instead of “production for profit.”

Sinclair soon found himself presiding over an explosively popular campaign, as thousands of volunteers across the state set up EPIC clubs — numbering more than 800 by election time — and sold the weekly EPIC News to raise campaign funds.

Mainstream Democrats waited too long to worry about Sinclair and then failed to unite behind an alternative candidate. But it would not have mattered. Sinclair celebrated a massive primary victory, gaining more votes than all of his opponents combined.

Newspapers around the world told the story.

“What is the matter with California?” The Boston Globe asked, according to author Greg Mitchell. “That is the farthest shift to the left ever made by voters of a major party in this country.”

Building fear

Primaries are one thing. But in 1934, the November general election turned in a different direction.

Terrified by Sinclair’s plan, business leaders mobilized to defeat EPIC, forming the kind of cross-party coalition that is rare in America except when radicals pose an electoral threat. Sinclair described the effort in a book he wrote shortly after the November election: “I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got Licked.”

Nearly every major newspaper in the state, including the five Democratic-leaning Hearst papers, joined the effort to stop Sinclair. Meanwhile, a high-priced advertising agency set up bipartisan groups with names like California League Against Sinclairism and Democrats for Merriam, trumpeting the names of prominent Democrats who refused to support Sinclair.

Few people of any party were enthusiastic about Merriam, who had recently angered many Californians by sending the National Guard to break a longshore strike in San Francisco, only to trigger a general strike that shut down the city.

The campaign against Sinclair attacked him with billboards, radio and newsreel programming, and relentless newspaper stories about his radical past and supposedly dangerous plans for California.

EPIC faced another challenge, candidate Raymond Haight, running on the Progressive Party label. Haight threatened to divide left-leaning voters.

Sinclair tried to defend himself, energetically denouncing what he called the “Lie Factory” and offering revised, more moderate versions of some elements of the EPIC plan. But the Red Scare campaign worked. Merriam easily outdistanced Sinclair, winning by a plurality in the three-way race.

New York, 2025

Will a Democratic Socialist running for mayor in New York face anything similar in the months ahead?

A movement to stop Mamdani is coming together, and some of what they are saying resonates with the 1934 campaign to stop Sinclair.

The Guardian newspaper has quoted “loquacious billionaire hedge funder Bill Ackman, who said he and others in the finance industry are ready to commit ‘hundreds of millions of dollars’ into an opposing campaign.”

In 1934, newspapers publicized threats by major companies, most famously Hollywood studios, to leave California in the event of a Sinclair victory. The Wall Street Journal, Fortune magazine and other media outlets have recently warned of similar threats.

And there may be something similar about the political dynamics.

Sinclair’s opponents could offer only a weak alternative candidate. Merriam had few friends and many critics.

In 2025, New York City Mayor Eric Adams, who abandoned the primary when he was running as a Democrat and is now running as an independent, is arguably weaker still, having been rescued by President Donald Trump from a corruption indictment that might have sent him to prison. If he is the best hope to stop Mamdani, the campaign strategy will likely parallel 1934. All attack ads – little effort to promote Adams.

But there is an important difference in the way the New York contest is setting up. Andrew Cuomo remains on the ballot as an independent, and his name could draw votes that might otherwise go to Adams.

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, will also be on the ballot. Whereas in 1934 two candidates divided progressive votes, in 2025 three candidates are going to divide the stop-Mamdani votes.

Religion also looms large in the campaign ahead. The New York City metro area’s U.S. Muslim population is said to be at least 600,000, compared to an estimated 1.6 million Jewish residents. Adams has announced that the threat of antisemitism will be the major theme of his campaign.

The stop-Sinclair campaign also relied on religion, focusing on his professed atheism and pulling quotations from books he had written denouncing organized religion. However, a statistical analysis of voting demographics suggests that this effort proved unimportant.

This candidate could finally be the one to take down the billionaires

I have no doubt that Zohran Mamdani, upset winner over the heavily favored former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary, would have greatly preferred that his much better financed opponent would graciously accept the will of his party’s voters, thereby allowing the Democratic nominee to sail on through the final election in November as is generally the case. And so would we, his supporters, all.

Instead, Mamdani finds himself actively opposed by elements of just about every significant anti-democratic, anti-working class faction in American politics. As the Talking Heads song put it, this race “ain’t no disco; this ain’t no fooling around.” Should Mamdani’s campaign prevail over all of them, the victory will realign the nation’s politics more profoundly than anything since the first Bernie Sanders presidential campaign — a shift the nation is obviously in desperate need of.

On the one side we have a candidate arguing the need to pull out all the stops, to try all avenues — increased rent control and housing construction, reduced transit fares, city-owned supermarkets, higher taxes on great wealth, and so on down the line — in an effort to allow the city’s working class to remain the city’s working class, rather than become a stream of economic refugees who can no longer afford to live there.

On the other side we’ve got a magpie’s cast of characters, united only by their dread of the prospect of a mayor siding with the struggling many, while openly acknowledging that the overprivileged few — the billionaires who think that the city owes it all to them — are not the saviors they think themselves to be, but are actually part and parcel of the problem.

First up in the cast, of course, is the Republican Party, nominally in the person of its candidate Curtis Sliwa, founder of the unarmed crime prevention group the Guardian Angels.

Sliwa, however, is not expected to be a factor in the final outcome. Naturally, the party’s interest in the race is primarily represented — as it is in all things — by our intermittently coherent president, who has fulminated about arresting Mamdani, revoking his citizenship, cutting off federal funding to the city, and even taking direct control of it, a threat he was bound to make sooner or later to some local government not to his taste.

Then we have the Democrats more interested in corporate cash than in the working class — unfortunately a rather large sector of the party — along with those troubled by the fact that Mamdani opposes Israel’s ongoing obliteration of Gaza, two groups with significant overlap.

This dominant wing of the party is actually directly involved in this race to an unusual degree by dint of the fact that the minority leaders of both branches of Congress — Rep. Hakeem Jeffries and Sen. Chuck Schumer — are Brooklyn voters.

So are they going to pull the lever for their party’s nominee in November? We don’t know. Neither has actually opposed Mamdani, but the failure of the party’s leaders to endorse him thus far is without recent precedent. Since Schumer was recently pleased to be seen smiling in a group photo with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, you can see the problem. Others have been outright hostile. Democrat Laura Gillen, representative of a New York city-adjacent district, for instance, has characterized Mamdani as “a threat to my constituents.”

Next we have the independent candidates themselves, who have now come to seem more like anti-Mamdani place holders, even though one of them is actually the current mayor of New York.

That would be Eric Adams, elected to the position as a Democrat, who declined to enter his party’s primary after running into a few bumps in the road during his term of office. The problems were indictment on charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States, wire fraud, soliciting campaign contributions from foreign nationals, and soliciting and accepting a bribe; and a subsequent pardon by the ubiquitous Donald Trump.

The other major one is Andrew Cuomo, one-time Democratic governor of New York, forced to resign in the face of numerous charges of sexual harassment, and loser of the Democratic primary, despite the backing of independent expenditure committees spending more than $25 million — the heaviest spending in the history of New York City politics.

Cuomo has decided that the voters deserve a second chance to make up for their error in not choosing him the first time and declared that this time “It’s all or nothing. We either win or even I will move to Florida.”

His campaign has subsequently declared this was a joke — the Florida part, not the second shot. But there is precedent: Trump decamped there after the state’s voters rejected him and certainly he could fix the ex-governor up with something at Mar-a-Lago. It’d only be fair after everything he’s done for Eric Adams.

And last, but certainly not least, we have the billionaires, starting with former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg, never one to shy from putting his money where his mouth is — he spent over $1 billion on his own four-month presidential campaign in 2020 (he won American Samoa) — dropped $8.3 million on the Cuomo effort.

Hedge fund manager Bill Ackman and William Lauder, executive chairman of The Estée Lauder Companies, were in for $500,000. Expedia chairman Barry Diller, Netflix chairman Reed Hastings, and hedge fund manager Daniel Loeb were down for $250,000. Alice Walton, of the Walmart family, contributed $100,000. Citadel CEO Ken Griffin was in for $50,000.

Ackman, Loeb, and Griffin were 2024 Trump supporters, by the way.

And reinforcements are on the way, with Hamptons polo patrons Kenneth and Maria Fishel of Renaissance Properties lining up new billionaires — in this case for Eric Adams — including grocery (Gristedes and D’Agostino) and real estate mogul John Catsimatidis, himself a former (Republican) candidate for New York City mayor.

As Kenneth Fishel told Fortune, “This is about keeping New York vibrant, keeping it free from socialism, and keeping it safe.”

At this point, this story might sound like something out of that recent Francis Ford Coppola movie that no one went to see, but it’s what’s actually happening.

(Personal disclosure: As one who was once slightly famous long ago, when elected to the Massachusetts Legislature at 32 as a self-described socialist — said to be the first since the Sacco and Vanzetti era — I am wildly jealous. Reading the news on election night, I was literally moved to tears of joy. And I don’t imagine I’m the only one feeling envious.

The upshot of all this? This is our race.

Who’s the we in “our”? Anyone who feels that we the people have to find a way to wrest control of the economic future of this country from the likes of Trump, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, all of the above-named billionaires, and the ones we don’t know. Whether it be knocking, calling, texting, posting, giving a buck — even if just that — all of us should give this race at least a bit of our attention. Just think of how sweet it will be to beat that whole crew.

  • Tom Gallagher is a former Massachusetts State Representative and the author of 'The Primary Route: How the 99% Take On the Military Industrial Complex.' He lives in San Francisco.

There's a tidal wave of reform coming — and Trump can't see it

When Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem unleashed her ICE shock troops on Los Angeles last month, she said: “We are not going away. We are staying here to liberate this city from the socialist” leaders.

Minutes later, California Senator Alex Padilla was forcibly removed from the press conference and put in handcuffs.

The specter of socialism is being used by Trump and his goons to make America even more authoritarian.

Trump even threatens to “run” New York City if its voters choose Zohran Mamdani — a Muslim of Indian descent and avowed democratic socialist — as their next mayor.

“We have tremendous power at the White House to run places when we have to,” says Trump, warning that he might step in and take control if New Yorkers elect Mamdani.

Trump is using the word “socialism” to slam everything the public needs and to justify cruel cuts in the nation’s safety net.

Trump’s just-enacted Big Ugly Bill will push more than 11 million Americans off Medicaid. Another 2 million Americans will lose food stamps. The savings will help finance a big tax cut for the wealthiest Americans.

But the next time they’re up for election, Republican lawmakers may be shocked to discover how many Americans prefer the “socialism” of Medicaid and food stamps to the socialism-for-the-rich tax cuts in the Big Ugly.

Medicaid alone has 83 percent favorability. Among Republicans, it’s a remarkable 74 percent.

Trump and his lackeys are living in another century if they think they can use “socialism” as a cudgel.

As early as 2011, the Pew Research Center found that almost as many voters under the age of 30 held a positive view of socialism as of capitalism.

During the 2016 Democratic primaries and then again in 2020, young people all over America wore buttons reading “feel the Bern” in honor of democratic socialist Bernie Sanders.

Whether it’s called socialism, democratic socialism, or enlightened capitalism, societies need to pool resources for the common good.

As it is, America spends very little on social insurance compared to other rich nations.

More than 26 million Americans still lack health insurance — and, as noted, at least 11 million more will lose it as a result of the Medicaid cuts in Trump’s Big Ugly.

We’re the only industrialized nation without paid family leave. We’re also the only one without minimal assistance for people in need.

Most other rich nations subsidize college for their young people, yet a large percentage of American households cannot afford to give their kids a four-year college education without going deeply into debt.

Most other rich nations also provide more comprehensive unemployment insurance, cheaper access to child care, and far more help with elder care.

These other nations aren’t “socialist.” They’re capitalist. But they take better care of their people.

American capitalism is the harshest in the world. Inequality here is worse than in any other rich nation. And our politics is far more polluted with big money.

These features are connected. Vast and growing inequalities of income and wealth have spawned big money into politics — with which the rich have gained tax cuts and corporate subsidies while limiting or reducing social spending.

Which is why America has lower tax rates on the super-rich than any other rich nation, one of the lowest life spans of all rich countries, and a higher percentage of homeless people. Trump’s new Big Ugly will make all this worse.

I don’t believe Americans will continue to tolerate this growing socialism for the rich and worsening social squalor for everyone else. Whether or not Zohran Mamdani is elected mayor of New York, we’re going to see a tidal wave of reform.

Most Americans need stronger safety nets and deserve a bigger piece of the economic pie, and they know it.

If you want to call this socialism, fine. I call it fair.

'Don't call me a liar!' Trump official snaps in heated clash with top Dem

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) faced off with President Donald Trump's Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy on Wednesday over the safety of New York City's subways and the lack of affordability of driving into Manhattan.

Nadler accused Duffy of claiming there was a "surge in subway assaults," and that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority was withholding the information from the public.

"Are you aware that major crime in the transit system, including assaults, is down 3% since last year and down 8% since 2019?" Nadler asked.

Duffy shot back, "No, that's wrong. The assaults we've seen are up 60% with MTA in the system since 2019."

Nadler called Duffy out for outright lying.

"Why do you continue to ignore this and lie about this in your public comments?" he asked.

"My question, why do you continue to lie about people being lit on fire in subways or pushed in front of trains?" Duffy countered. "You should be fighting to make sure your subways are safe."

Nadler reclaimed his time before declaring, "Our subways are safe and I gave you the statistics."

Duffy argued that New York streets favor the "elites" with outsized pricing for those driving into Manhattan.

"Secretary Duffy, why do you continue to lie —"

"You're lying! Don't call me a liar here!" Duffy cut him off.

"I'm calling you a liar because you've lied continually," Nadler interjected.

Duffy argued that "everyone" should have access to drive into the city, "and if you're going to force people into a subway, make sure it's safe!"

The two then came full circle.

"It is safe, I gave you the statistics," Nadler shot back, to which Duffy sniped, "I gave you the stats."

"Well, your statistics are wrong," Nadler said before closing the file folder on the desk in front of him.

Watch the clip via Forbes on YouTube below.

https://www.rawstory.com/sean-duffy-2673282974/

Trump snaps and threatens to arrest NYC's Mamdani: 'We don't need a communist'

President Donald Trump took reporters' questions while visiting what's been dubbed "Alligator Alcatraz," the 5,000-bed migrant detention center of tents and FEMA trucks recently cobbled together near the Florida Everglades.

One reporter asked Trump what he thought about news that 33-year-old naturalized citizen Zohran Mamdani had won the Democratic nomination in the New York City mayor's race.

"Your beloved New York City may well be led by a communist, soon — Zohran Mamdami — who, in his nomination speech, said he will defy ICE and will not let criminal aliens arrested in New York City," the reporter began before asking for "your message to communist Zohran Mamdami."

"Well, then, we'll have to arrest him," Trump snapped. "Look, we don't need a communist in this country, but if we have one, I'm going to be watching over him very carefully on behalf of the nation."

Trump claimed, "We send him money, we send him all the things that he needs to run a government," even though Mamdani hasn't yet won the full election.

Trump repeated, "We're going to be watching that very carefully, and a lot of people saying he's here illegally, but we're going to look at everything. But, and ideally, he's going to turn out to be much less than a communist. But right now, he's a communist. That's not a socialist."

Mamdani identifies as a democratic socialist, which, according to The Washington Post, "combines a 'commitment to democracy' with a 'skepticism about the compatibility of capitalism and democracy.'"

Robert Lieberman, a professor of political science at Johns Hopkins University, told the Post, "The approach to addressing that incompatibility 'is where it gets complicated because the skepticism comes in a lot of different flavors.'”

At Monday's White House press briefing, Fox News's Peter Doocy asked about possible denaturalization proceedings since Mamdani "could have misrepresented or concealed material support for terrorism based on rap lyrics he wrote in 2017."

Press secretary Karoline Leavitt said she would look into it, adding, "Surely if they are true, it's something that should be investigated."

Watch the clip below via Fox News.

Copyright © 2025 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | Manage Preferences | Debug Logs
For corrections contact corrections@rawstory.com , for support contact support@rawstory.com .