All posts tagged "zohran mamdani"

These signs show a new force is coming to clean out the White House

The media is freaking out over a new Rasmussen poll that found:

“A majority of voters under 40 want a democratic socialist to win the White House in the next presidential election.

“… 51 percent of Likely U.S. Voters ages 18 to 39 would like to see a democratic socialist candidate win the 2028 presidential election. Thirty-six percent (36 percent) don’t want a democratic socialist to win in 2028, while 17 percent are not sure…

“Among the youngest cohort (ages 18-24) of voters, 57 percent want a democratic socialist to win the next presidential election…

“Among those who voted for Kamala Harris in last year’s presidential election, 78 percent would like to see a democratic socialist candidate win the 2028 presidential election…” (emphasis added).

I was on Ali Velshi’s MSNOW show discussing this, along with Michael Green who recently wrote a thought-provoking article about how the official poverty line in America is completely out-of-date and out of touch with the needs of most Americans. I shared a few statistics from my recent book The Hidden History of the American Dream: the Demise of the Middle Class and How to Rescue Our Future:

When, in 1957, my dad bought the house I grew up in, the average cost of a single-family home in America was about 2.2 times the average annual wage. Today it’s more than ten times the average wage.
When my Boomer generation was the same age as today’s Millennials, we owned a bit over 22 percent of the nation’s wealth; Millennials today control only about 4 percent of the country’s wealth (and it’s the same for Zoomers).
From the 1930s right up until the Reagan Revolution, it was possible for seniors to live comfortably on Social Security alone; Reagan undid that with his “reforms” so today that’s nearly impossible.
When I ran my first seriously successful business in the early 1970s, it cost me around $35/month for comprehensive health insurance for each of my 18 employees; at that time hospitals and health insurance companies were required by Michigan law (where I lived; most other states were identical) to be run as non-profits. Today, health insurance can be as much as one-fifth of a company’s payroll expense.
When Reagan came into office in 1981, a single wage earner could support a family with a middle-class lifestyle, and fully 65 percent of us were in the middle class (up from around 20 percent in the 1930s). Today, after 44 years of Reaganomics, it takes two full-time people to achieve the same status, which triggers huge childcare expenses, which is part of why only 43 percent of us are middle class .

FDR’s great — and successful — Democratic Socialist experiment following the Republican Great Depression was to drive the economy from the bottom up, reversing the “Horse and Sparrow” trickle-down economics and deregulation of the Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover administrations that provoked the Great Crash.

He did that by:

Expanding the notion of the commons — the stuff we all collectively own and is administered or funded and regulated by government — to include free public education nationwide (and cheap college), old-age retirement (Social Security), and public power and transportation systems (Tennessee Valley Authority, federal support for local transit, roads and highways).
Legalizing unions, an effort that was so successful that when Reagan came into office fully a third of us had good union jobs and, because they set the local wage floors, two-thirds of Americans had the equivalent of a union wage and benefit package.
Establishing a minimum wage on which a single worker could raise a family of three and still stay above the federal poverty level (today’s federal minimum wage is $7.25: adjusted with the Consumer Price Index, that $1.60 minimum wage in 1968 is equivalent to about $14.90 an hour in 2025 dollars).

In the years since, we’ve continued to expand the commons by establishing national single-payer healthcare systems for low-income people (Medicaid) and retired people (Medicare), both of which came out of LBJ’s Democratic Socialist program that he called The Great Society.

Meanwhile, Republicans and a few neoliberal Democrats have pushed back against these Democratic Socialist programs that made the American middle class the first in the history of the world to exceed more than half the population.

Reagan’s war on unions has cut our union membership down to well under 10 percent in the private sector.
His gutting federal funding for education has exploded college costs to the point where three generations are saddled with over $2 trillion in debt that can’t be discharged by bankruptcy.
Reagan’s tax cuts for the rich (from 74 percent down to 27 percent) and corporations tripled the national debt (from $800 billion to $2.4 trillion) just in his eight years; since then the four GW Bush and Trump tax cuts have, when combined with Reagan’s, produced a $38 trillion national debt so big that we now spend more on servicing their debt than we do on our defense budget or would on administering a national healthcare system.

Back in the 1940s, after the incredible success of the New Deal, President Roosevelt wanted to further expand the commons by expanding the scope of his Democratic Socialist programs. Just before he died, he proposed a “Second Bill of Rights” that included:

“The right to a useful and remunerative job in the nation’s industries, shops, farms, or mines. (Unionization and an above-poverty-level minimum wage.)
“The right to earn enough to provide adequate food, clothing, and recreation. (Ditto and government as the employer of last resort.)
“The right of every farmer to raise and sell products at a return that gives his family a decent living. (Don’t manipulate farm prices with stupid tariff wars, etc., and make the government the purchaser of last resort.)
“The right of every businessperson, large and small, to trade free from unfair competition and domination by monopolies. (Break up the giant corporations and encourage average people to start small businesses, including with loan supports.)
“The right of every family to a decent home. (Today this would mean no more corporations, hedge funds, and foreign billionaires owning single-family homes to squeeze us dry by jacking up rents.)
“The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to enjoy good health. (FDR favored a single-payer healthcare system like Medicare for All.)
“The right to protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment (i.e., robust Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment insurance).
“The right to a good education.” (Free or inexpensive college, quality public schools in every community.)

Much to the chagrin of my Republican-activist father, my grandfather (a 1917 Norwegian immigrant) frequently and proudly described himself as a socialist. When I asked him what he meant, he always pointed me to FDR, the New Deal, and his proposed Second Bill of Rights.

And here we are again.

My grandfather’s generation saw up-close and firsthand the tax-cutting and deregulation binge of the Roaring 20s (which were only “roaring” for the morbidly rich), and then had the lived experience of watching FDR put the country back together and create the world’s first widespread middle class.

Millennials and Zoomers today are seeing the same thing, between the Bush Housing Crash of 2008, the botched Covid Crash of 2020, and the GOP’s relentless program to drive the wealth of the nation into the money bins of the billionaires who own that party.

They see the example of most European countries, where the commons includes college (many will actually pay you a stipend to attend), healthcare, and daycare/preschool, and union density is often well above 80%. Housing is subsidized or heavily regulated, leading several to have essentially ended homelessness. Giant corporate monopolies are prohibited and local small businesses are encouraged.

Europeans call these programs Democratic Socialism or social democracy, and young Americans clearly are enthusiastic about bringing the “European Dream” to this country.

My sense is that — much like in the 1930s — a significant majority of Americans are sick of the neoliberal “let the rich run things because they know best” bullshit that Republicans, “Tech Bros,” and a shrinking minority of on-the-take Democratic politicians embrace.

Meanwhile, nobody’s sure why the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is refusing to release the autopsy they did of the 2024 election, producing speculation it may have uncovered examples of Russian and Republican manipulation of both voters and the vote, but I’m guessing the real reason is that the neoliberals who largely run the DNC saw feedback that reflected the Rasmussen poll I opened this article with.

The exploding popularity of progressive politicians from Zohran Mamdani to Bernie Sanders, Jasmine Crockett, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez aren’t an anomaly; they’re a signpost to both electoral and governing success for the next generation of genuinely progressive Democratic politicians.

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.

Norman Solomon is the national director of RootsAction and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. The paperback edition of his latest book, War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine, includes an afterword about the Gaza war.

'He blew it up in minutes': Trump has 'complicated' GOP rep campaign after Mamdani meeting

Donald Trump may have complicated the campaign trail for a GOP hopeful by meeting with Zohran Mamdani, according to a political commentator.

The president would call the New York City mayor elect a "really good" candidate for the job, with a flood of compliments from Trump surprising political commentators. Nick Reisman, writing in Politico, believes the impression Mamdani made on the president, and Trump's subsequent comments, puts the gubernational bid of Elise Stefanik at risk.

Rep. Stefanik is building her campaign against Governor Kathy Hochul but Reisman believes Trump has blown Stefanik's chances out of the water by heaping praise onto Mamdani.

Stefanik had made it clear where she stands on Mamdani, telling News 12 earlier today, "He is a jihadist. This is an area where President Trump and I disagree. But what we all want to work toward is making New York more affordable and safe, and that’s where I have a very strong record and working relationship with the administration."

The hard line against Mamdani in Stefanik's campaign has collapsed according to Reisman, who wrote, "The New York Republican is mounting an uphill gubernatorial bid in a deep blue state, building her campaign on the argument that Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul is the nation’s worst chief executive — and tying Hochul to the 34-year-old democratic socialist who will soon lead New York City. Trump blew up that message in minutes."

"In the Oval Office, he said he wouldn’t worry about living in New York under Mamdani, noted how many voters they share and even complimented the mayor-elect’s looks. And in a rare bit of daylight with Stefanik, he declined to repeat her claim that Mamdani is 'a jihadist.'"

Talk show host Jimmy Kimmel noted the striking impression Mamdani had left on the president, suggesting Trump may even prefer the 34-year-old democratic socialist to JD Vance.

Kimmel said, "Trump now looks over in the corner, he sees JD Vance. All sweaty and eager. Looks away, he sees Stephen Miller, sucking on his pinkies and he looks around at all these weird, unattractive, AI-generated human vomits in his office and is like, 'Why can't I have this Mamdani around?'"

Mamdani would say of his meeting with Trump, "It was a productive meeting focused on a shared admiration and love which is New York City, and the need to deliver affordability to New Yorkers, the 8.5 million people who call our city their home, who are struggling to afford life in the most expensive city in the United States of America."

'Sweaty and eager': Kimmel rips into Trump staff after president won over by Mamdani

A meeting between Donald Trump and Zohran Mamdani has surprised some political commentators with how friendly it seemed.

The president and New York City's mayor elect met at the Oval Office for a meeting that looked favourable to many, including talk show host Jimmy Kimmel, who joked that Trump may prefer Mamdani to his own administration. Speaking in the opening monologue of Jimmy Kimmel Live, the 58-year-old suggested Trump was won over by Mamdani.

He said, "After weeks of painting Mamdani as the fourth horseman of the apocalypse, they didn't know what to do with themselves. This is how upside down this crop of MAGA-teers is. They're mad at Trump, some of them are furious at Trump, because he was friendly with the new mayor of New York.

"Last week he had a big celebratory dinner for the Saudi Prince, whose goons dismembered a columnist for the Washington Post. No problem. This? Too much. I've got news for you guys, anybody who's surprised that Trump got along with Mamdani, you should not be surprised. Trump loves when famous people come to visit."

Mamdani and Trump were seen smiling together in the White House, with the president admitting he had more in common with the Democrat mayor's policies than first thought. Trump said, "We agree on a lot more than I would have thought."

Kimmel would go on to say "big star" Mamdani had won the president over because Trump had looked at who was in his cabinet. The talk show host imagined a scenario where Trump had "looked over at the corner" while shaking Mamdani's hand, and saw JD Vance and various members of the Trump administration.

The talk show host went on to describe the surprisingly friendly meeting between Trump and Mamdani as the "classic opposites attract love story".

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:

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.
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.
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.
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.
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 is serious': Trump plans 'audacious' move to swing election result

In a sharp move to give former Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) a push to defeat Democrat and front-runner Zohran Mamdani in the New York City mayor's race this November, advisors to President Donald Trump say he's considered giving Mayor Eric Adams an administration position.

Adams was offered a position at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, an anonymous person with direct knowledge told Politico. Adams denied the reports, saying he is not dropping out of the race.

Polls show Adams trails in fourth place, and the possible move could aim to potentially damage Mamdani's chances in the general election and give Cuomo a path to victory, The New York Times reports. Insiders also shared that the administration is looking for a role for Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa.

The Times called it a "potentially audacious intervention."

Billionaire grocery and oil magnate John Catsimatidis told the Times that after speaking with Trump on Sunday about the election, he thought the race may change within days.

“He’s very concerned,” Catsimatidis said of Trump. “How do they say it, this is for all the tea in China. This is serious.”

Mamdani wrote on X that the Times report confirmed his opponents were backed by Trump.

"Today’s news confirms it: Cuomo is Trump’s choice for Mayor," he wrote. "The White House is considering jobs for Adams and Sliwa to clear the field. New Yorkers are sick of corrupt politics and backroom deals. No matter who’s running, we will deliver a better future on November 4."

It's unclear if the discussions have led to any decisions from Adams, who is a Democrat running as an independent. Sources indicated to The Times that nothing has been confirmed, and an anonymous source said talks were heading in "several different directions."

“Mayor Adams is a lifelong New Yorker who has dedicated his entire career to this city, and he intends to continue that work for another four years as mayor,” the spokeswoman, Kayla Mamelak Altus, said in a statement.

Cuomo has known Trump for more than 40 years. The former New York governor, who resigned in 2021 after multiple reports of sexual harassment, conceded to Mamdani after he was defeated by the 33-year-old self-professed socialist in the primary elections.

Sliwa has not confirmed if any Trump advisors have contacted him, stating he is "committed to carrying this fight through to Election Day."

‘Pathetic’: Elise Stefanik hit with blistering rebuke on CNN over post-shooting smear

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) clapped back when confronted with comments by Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) in the wake of the Manhattan mass shooting that claimed the lives of an NYPD police officer and four others.

Stefanik has said she intends to run for governor in the future, but was not ready to make an announcement quite yet.

CNN's Manu Raju read Stefanik's social media posts following the tragedy. She aimed at both Hochul and New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, calling him "Kathy Hochul’s very own Commie Mamdani" for participating in the 2020 "Defund the Police" campaign.

"We cannot allow radical anti-police dangerous policies to continue to make it less safe for families especially law enforcement officers in New York," Stefanik wrote.

"That's about as pathetic as it gets," said a disgusted Hochul. "I mean, seriously — going after an unelected official who said something back in 2020 when many people were — I mean, come on, give me a break.

"Ask her the question: What are you doing to make your constituents safe?" Hochul said, referring to Stefanik's support of President Donald Trump's Big Beautiful Bill.

"You don't mind taking away their health care. You don't mind education cuts. You don't mind nutrition cuts. You don't mind hurting your farmers. Like, why don't you have some spine and stand up for the people who put you in your spot? And so, that's what I'm looking for. People to not be deflecting. Stand up to the gun lobby and show that you have the courage to do something that's actually pretty useful, instead of just complaining about tweets."

When asked if she supported Mamdani, a democratic socialist who won the Democratic primary for mayor, Hochul deferred to the grieving families of those who were lost on Monday evening.

"I'm sorry, you know, we're not talking politics. This is not the time and place for it," Hochul said. "It's about action and showing compassion and empathy for people's lives who are forever destroyed. And a new baby on the way, who's never going to know the baby's father? I mean, this is what I'm thinking about today, not politics."

NYPD Officer Didarul Islam, 36, was killed in the mass shooting, leaving behind a wife, two children, and an unborn child.

Watch the clip below via CNN.

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.