Many people in the news media who were shocked by Zohran Mamdani's win in the NYC mayoral primary are the same ones ignoring the mechanics of his victory.
The panel on the MSNBC vid above pretty much gets it right. My views on it are not terribly different.
Mamdani was able to energize younger voters at a time youth turnout had been falling.
The Mamdani campaign had a great ground game. Volunteers talked to voters in person in the neighborhoods.
Mamdani made himself easily available to journalists and community groups.
The issue most central to the Mamdani campaign was affordability – something almost all voters can relate to.
Self-serving scare tactics by the wealthy establishment were dismissed by voters who warmed to Mamdani's more positive messaging.
In short, Mamdani largely ran a notably traditional old school campaign with the help of some contemporary technology.
Interacting personally with voters is the easiest way to bypass broligarch social media and cable. People on our side who endlessly wail about pro-Trump media and social media making it impossible for us to win forget that precinct work was the very open secret for the success of 20th century political machines. A "machine" is simply an in-person network.
Finding out what is on voters' minds rather than preaching to them is how you win their votes.
Duplicating the methods of the successful Mamdani campaign and applying them to campaigns across the US should be a high national priority for Democrats.
Trump started a gerrymandering war to keep MAGA GOP in control of the House. It increasingly looks like he may not win it.
Hope you're ready for some good news in a long post. 😁
After the elections two weeks ago, the NYT's chief political analyst Nate Cohn published this edition of his newsletter. (archived)
Why Democrats Could Win the Redistricting War
Republicans have had an advantage in this year’s redistricting wars because they control the redistricting process in states with more Democratic-held congressional seats.
But this advantage is starting to look shaky — shaky enough that it’s possible to imagine how Democrats could fight the redistricting wars to a draw ahead of the 2026 midterms, and perhaps even win them by the 2028 election.
What’s changed? Much of the Republican advantage stems from the significant constitutional limitations on gerrymandering in blue states. But now Democrats are demonstrating the ability — and the will — to amend blue state constitutions to allow for partisan gerrymandering. If they do so in enough states, they could redraw enough Republican-held districts to turn the redistricting war in their favor. This outcome may still be unlikely, but this week’s elections have made it easier to imagine.
On Tuesday, California voted to amend its state constitution to enact a new Democratic gerrymandered map, potentially costing Republicans up to five districts. The ballot measure was expected to pass; what was more surprising was the margin. While many votes remain to be counted, “Yes” leads on redistricting by 28 points, 64 percent to 36 percent. That’s a wider margin than Kamala Harris’s 20 point-win in the state in 2024.
[ ... ]
But just a few weeks ago, Virginia Democrats announced they would try to amend their state’s constitution to allow for partisan gerrymandering ahead of the 2026 election. This was a big surprise. Virginia is not a solid blue state. And Democrats were announcing the effort just ahead of state elections. Ordinarily, a pre-election gerrymandering amendment might seem like a brazen political risk.
But on Tuesday, Democrats didn’t just win the governor’s race in a landslide; they also won nearly-two thirds of the state House. And if California’s redistricting initiative won by 28 points, the requisite ballot measure in Virginia would be clearly favored to pass as well.
The ballot measure in California had been expected to pass – but it passed by a landslide. The Virginia trifecta for Dems is a large dollop of icing on a big Election Day cake.
Back to the numbers...
If Virginia Democrats follow California, together Democrats will gain control over an additional 14 districts held by Republicans, bringing them up to 19 overall. If New York and Colorado do the same by 2028, that would be another 11 districts — bringing Democrats up to 30 seats, all but matching the number of districts that Republicans could potentially eliminate.
A tie in the gerrymander war is effectively a loss for Trump. Democrats have shown more enthusiasm about voting than Republicans have during Trump's second term.
The GOP Kansas legislature may try to eliminate the one safe Democratic district in that state. But if there's a Blue Wave in 2026, the move could backfire.
Take Kansas, where Republicans want to dismantle the state’s sole Democratic district and draw a 4-0 map. On paper, this could yield four districts that voted for Mr. Trump by 16 points, which sounds like a lopsided margin. But coming off an election where Democrats often improved on Ms. Harris’s performance by as much as 10 points, all four of those seats could plausibly be single-digit races and competitive.
Moreover, the congresswoman in that Democratic district, Sharice Davids, said she would run for Senate if the state redrew its map. If so, the Kansas Senate race would also look like a plausibly competitive race, one where Republicans might need to spend millions of dollars against a serious and well-funded challenger to secure a high-single-digit win.
More bad news for Trump this week.
Indiana Senate Says No to Redistricting
Trump is having a hissy fit and called his lapdog governor in Indiana to complain. But the votes just don't seem to be there in the legislature.
And if they change their minds in Indiana, Maryland could then move to eliminate its one safe GOP district.
According to the Center for Politics at University of Virginia, Republicans are currently up in the gerrymandering war by just 2 seats.
^^^ But that does not include any action which could be taken by the Dem trifecta in Virginia.
It probably doesn't include a pleasant surprise Dems received in Utah. Thanks to a court decision, Utah Dems will be getting a new US House district whose voters gave Kamala Harris a margin of 23% last year.
Utah Democrats got a gift. Now comes the headache.
A tiny advantage by Republicans would be useless if 2026 turns out to be a Blue Wave year like 2018, 2006, or (drools) 1974.
A Democratic House majority means control of House committees. That means power of subpoena when investigating MAGA Trump corruption. It's the first phase in returning the country to democracy. Of course a Democratic majority also means we can say goodbye to the smarmy Speaker Mike Johnson.
The midterms are just 50 weeks away. In swing districts, your efforts as a volunteer are more valuable than making campaign contributions or posting online memes.
The recent NYC mayoral election showed that precinct work is the key to electoral success. Your neighbors are more likely to listen to you than to TV or social media ads. The irony of one-on-one campaign outreach is that the most successful campaign volunteers are the ones who listen the most to voters.
Hungary offers lessons in defeating right-wing populists.
The victory of Péter Magyar's Tisza Party over authoritarian Viktor Orbán was several years in the making. And like any successful coalition, it required its components to accommodate each other.
We in the US should examine Tisza's victory and determine which aspects of its campaign can be applied to our own struggle against authoritarianism.
After resoundingly losing national elections held on April 12, Orbán has become a parable for how populism can be defeated.
His political demise was hardly inevitable. It had to be shrewdly engineered by politicians and voters who put aside their ideological differences to defeat him. In politics, there is no natural law of self-correction.
[ ... ]
Péter Magyar, the presumptive next prime minister, triumphed against a tilted electoral system—gerrymandered districts, government influence over traditional media and even over the country’s billboards—designed to keep Fidesz in power. Magyar understood that such a regime does not simply collapse under the weight of its own contradictions and mismanagement.
Yep, régimes do not fall on their own, it require work, cooperation, patience, and a unifying message to undo the authoritarian grip on power.
One of Tisza’s most illuminating campaign slogans was “Not left, not right, only Hungarians”—which promised an ideologically diverse movement to roll back Orbán’s corruption and cronyism. Emmanuel Macron’s party deployed a similar slogan, “Neither left nor right,” in 2017, when it also quickly went from nowhere to complete power in France. In the United States, the party duopoly is more entrenched, but you could argue that Barack Obama executed the trick in 2008 when he convincingly pitched himself as president for neither red America nor blue America.
Not conceding any part of the country or any community was key to Tisza's success.
Magyar directly campaigned all throughout Hungary, including in rural constituencies that tended to go unvisited because they were considered Fidesz’s heartland. Benjamin Novak, a former journalist and an analyst of Hungarian politics, told me that after years of scandal and inflation and slow growth in the country, Magyar’s indictment of the Orbán regime resonated widely. “The lived experience of Hungarians was that Hungary is falling apart,” Novak said. “And these guys are so corrupt that they have no idea what they’re doing.” Magyar’s momentum persuaded other opposition parties across the political spectrum to stand down to avoid splitting the anti-Fidesz vote. Factionalism was effectively suspended. In American terms, the rallying behind Magyar (whose name is the Hungarian word for “Hungarian”) would be like an ex-MAGA Republican named Peter American winning the Democratic nomination with the endorsement of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Marjorie Taylor Greene.
While US politics doesn't happen like that, there are stupid third parties which insist on running hopeless candidates for president. And there are clueless voters (claiming to be progressive) who support them who end up indirectly electing disastrous Republicans. Without Ralph Nader in 2000 there would not have been a President George W. Bush; without Jill Stein in 2016, there would not have been a President Donald Trump. BTW, Bush and Trump account for 5 of the 9 appointees to the US Supreme Court.
In Hungary, Orbán demonized people and institutions he didn't like. But his corruption, incompetence, and economic mismanagement made him an easy target for demonization himself.
Until now, Orbán had succeeded through us-versus-them politics—Budapest against Brussels, Hungarians against Ukrainians, citizens against globalists. But instead of taking the opposite of Orbán’s side on the wisdom of EU bureaucracy, trans rights, or the Russia-Ukraine war, Magyar constructed an entirely different debate focused on the ruling party’s corruption, inflation, and neglect of public services. (In political-science terms, Magyar succeeded because his party achieved “transformative repolarization” rather than “reciprocal polarization.”)
Politicians in the West simply don't win by supporting wide open migration.
The parties that have had the most success against the populist right have shown similar messaging discipline. In Poland, the nationalist, conservative Law and Justice Party lost in 2023 to a broad coalition led by Donald Tusk—a centrist former president of the European Council who nevertheless opposes current EU migration policy and makes statements such as “If we are open to all forms of migration without any control, our world will collapse.” In Denmark, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, the leader of the center-left Social Democrats, has maintained power for seven years in part by championing strict laws on asylum and assimilation that might exceed even the imagination of Stephen Miller (for example: tearing down homes in neighborhoods that had too many “non-Western” residents). In each case, mainstream parties learned to adapt in ways that made them more competitive against radical ones.
Like it or not, voters just don't want mass migration these days. However, measured and regulated immigration is fine with a majority of Americans.
Wide open borders paved the way for Trump's return. For all practical purposes, those high visibility migrant caravans were free advertising for MAGA.
In the US, many liberals don't understand the difference between patriotism (good) and nationalism (bad). Péter Magyar literally waved the Hungarian flag at rallies which were vast seas of Hungarian colors. We need to make this comment by the late über-liberal Bill Moyers a fundamental part of our thinking:
The flag belongs to the country, not to the government.
And it certainly doesn't belong to Republicans. By conceding the flag and other national symbols, you concede America.
In the United States, many of Donald Trump’s most fervent critics do something rather different: When the president and Fox News criticize an idea, Democrats declare themselves to be for it. This dynamic not only allows MAGA Republicans to set the terms of the American political debate but also boxes Democrats into backing unpopular policy positions: defunding the police; limiting immigration enforcement, even for criminals; insisting upon allowing the participation of trans women in women’s sports. Roger Scruton, the late British conservative philosopher, brought to prominence the idea of “oikophobia”—that is, a feeling of embarrassment about one’s home country and of affection for foreign societies that arises as a reaction to xenophobia. This affliction is not uncommon among American Democrats, and it concedes the field of patriotism to Republicans. This is an error that successful anti-populists such as Magyar and Tusk do not fall into.
Social media has done a lot to box Democratic politicians into maximalist positions which are not popular with the majority of voters.
In 2019 Nate Cohn and Kevin Quealy at the New York Times did a study of Democrats on Twitter. They concluded that Democrats who were particularly active on (then) Twitter were not all that representative of Democrats in real life.
Today’s Democratic Party is increasingly perceived as dominated by its “woke” left wing. But the views of Democrats on social media often bear little resemblance to those of the wider Democratic electorate.
The outspoken group of Democratic-leaning voters on social media is outnumbered, roughly 2 to 1, by the more moderate, more diverse and less educated group of Democrats who typically don’t post political content online, according to data from the Hidden Tribes Project. This latter group has the numbers to decide the Democratic presidential nomination in favor of a relatively moderate establishment favorite, as it has often done in the past.
[ ... ]
But it would also be a mistake to assume that outrage on social media means outrage throughout the broader electorate. And it would be a mistake to assume that more moderate Democrats are out of step with the party’s electorate.
Get a better idea of what your Democratic neighbors are thinking. A great way is to actually talk with them and listen to their concerns. The vast majority do not spend 16 hours a day doom scrolling or posting hyperbolic outrage directed at any Democratic politician who does not agree with them 250% of the time.
NYC is not majority socialist. Yet Zohran Mamdani won a decisive victory in his race for mayor. He had volunteers knock on doors and listen to voters across the city. Affordability and accountability by officials counted way more than culture war issues. Democrats who wish to be successful this year should do local or statewide adaptations of his campaign with heavy emphasis on person-to-person contact with voters.
Viktor Orbán had been in office since 2010. He was already deeply entrenched by the time Trump took his famous escalator ride. You could say that the road to MAGA went through Budapest. Péter Magyar shows us that the road out of MAGA also runs through Budapest.
If Democrats take control of either chamber of Congress in the 2026 midterms, they gain subpoena power over Trump and can conduct investigations into his graft and corruption.
Now is a good time to look into helping the Democratic candidates in your district or state. Volunteers are especially needed to do one-to-one outreach to voters.
Voters are more likely to listen to their neighbors than to ads on TV or social media. Personal interaction is the only practical way to bypass broligarch domination of the communications industry. Pounding the pavement in your neighborhood will yield far more votes than pounding your keyboard.
NYC Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani appeared on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.
It was a great conversation which dealt with public safety, affordability, housing, quality of life, and other issues. Of course it also had moments of humor.
Near the beginning, Mamdani talked about what has been powering his campaign – person to person outreach. Seriously, there is no better tactic for winning an election than talking to people one on one. Slate has an excellent article (archived) where one of its writers accompanied Mamdani volunteers going door to door in Queens.
The doomers, gloomers, and whiners perpetually moan that... MAGA owns all the social media!; Republicans have most of the billionaires!; and Nobody will listen to us!.
But we can still win elections if we replace hitting the keyboards with hitting the pavement. This is how campaigning worked before candidates started to pour enormous amounts of money into TV ads and (later) the internet. The new way of winning elections is the same as the old way before the 1960s. So, back to the future!
If you establish a connection with people, they're much more likely to believe you than a slick ad on broligarch media. That is a major lesson of the Zohran Mamdani campaign. This needs to be applied nationally in 2026 and 2028.
NOTE: Early voting in NYC continues through Sunday the 2nd. Election Day is Tuesday the 4th. Opinion polls do not decide elections. Polls don't vote, people vote.
GOP lawmakers in Washington have stumbled onto one neat trick to abet the president’s lawlessness—dismantle their own power.
From Day One, Donald Trump would not have been able to usurp power without the grinning assistance of Capitol Hill Republicans. They share the blame for the destruction and chaos of the last few months.
The fundamental story of Trump’s second term has been his usurpation of powers traditionally granted to the legislative branch. Congress created the networks of federal agencies and programs that help govern the country; Trump has asserted the power to shut them down at will. Congress has the constitutional power to set tariffs and other taxes; Trump has unilaterally imposed them on most of the world in ways that are not only economically ruinous but likely illegal as well.
[ ... ]
Over the last three months, we’ve seen something even more ominous: Republican senators and representatives acting as willing partners in the destruction of their own branch of government’s power, all on Trump’s behalf. The Constitution is designed for tension between the three branches of government; it cannot function if one branch proclaims its supremacy and the other two give up without a fight.
Even the judicial branch has had more cojones about curbing executive branch power.
The Supreme Court, to its partial credit, took steps to preserve its own authority in recent weeks. (I only give them partial credit because they created this monster in the first place.) Their order last month to immediately halt Alien Enemies Act deportations came from an unmistakable concern that the Trump administration was trying to evade judicial review.
The same thing can’t be said for Congress. Republican lawmakers may think that they are following their constituents’ wishes by reflexively obeying Trump’s whims. Allowing a president to usurp the powers of one branch and ignore the orders of another one is not in anyone’s long-term interest—and especially not theirs.
If you want to stop Trump, you have to do it via Congress. That means putting pressure on Capitol Hill Republicans that goes beyond the ineffectual mantra of "call or email your representative or senator".
I've said this before and I'll say it again...
All of our US reps and senators have one or more offices back in their home districts and states. If your GOP senator is up for re-election next year or if your GOP rep won by a relatively narrow margin in 2024, pay a visit to that office during business hours. Post about your visit online. If the visit is unsatisfactory, return with a few dozen like-minded voters from the same district or state and conduct some sort of legal protest; informational picketing, street theater, or prayer vigils can work well. Tailor your protest to the local community.
Only pressure on individual Capitol Hill Republicans can do anything at this point. That means: 1] calling them out very publicly for colluding with Trump's gutting of our American system AND 2] doing precinct work to pave the way for their electoral defeat in 2026. The era of slacktivism and fundraging is over. It's time to become more directly involved in the political process.
People who live in US House districts won by Republicans with margins of 9% or under in 2024 have more influence than most of us. If you live in one of these districts then you have a great amount of leverage over your rep.
If just five of those reps stood up to Trump then the entire Trump autocracy project would get derailed.
A new poll from a Democratic firm signals Republicans face backlash in one of America’s most tightly divided regions.
Pennsylvania is a swing state and Bucks County is a swing county in Pennsylvania. So it doesn't bode well for MAGA that Trump is now tanking there.
A new private poll in one of the nation’s top bellwethers shows President Donald Trump’s popularity taking a nosedive and Democrats staking out a lead in local elections — a potential warning sign for Republicans in the 2026 midterms.
Fifty-three percent of likely voters in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, view Trump unfavorably, compared to 42 percent who see him favorably, according to the survey by the Democratic firm Upswing Research & Strategy that was shared first with POLITICO.
Bucks County, a suburb of Philadelphia, is a perennial battleground targeted by candidates for president and statewide office. It was Bucks County where Trump made his famous appearance at a McDonald’s and manned a fry station in the 2024 election. Trump won it by less than 1 percentage point last year after former President Joe Biden narrowly carried it in 2020.
Yep. it's the site of the Trump McDonald's. But more importantly for 2026, it's the home of an increasingly vulnerable US House member.
GOP Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick represents a district made up almost entirely of Bucks County. The survey did not ask respondents about Fitzpatrick, who Democrats have tried to unseat in every election since he joined Congress in 2017. He has managed to weather difficult political terrain by cultivating a moderate persona independent from his party. He was one of only two House Republicans to vote against the final passage of Trump’s signature bill this year, but Democrats are hoping to pierce his maverick image in next year’s race.
“It’s clear that there is some backlash against Trump and MAGA Republicans generally,” said Ethan Smith, a founding partner at Upswing Research & Strategy. “The survey also shows that we’re probably entering a period of Democratic enthusiasm. We can tell just based on response rates that Democrats are really eager to participate in the election.”
The poll of Bucks County voters also underscores the uphill battle that Republican Stacy Garrity faces as she takes on Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro. Shapiro, who hails from the voter-rich Philly suburbs, has a 55 percent favorable rating in the survey (27 percent view him unfavorably). And it’s not just Democrats who favor the incumbent governor. Nearly a quarter of GOP voters in the poll viewed Shapiro favorably.
Gov. Josh Shapiro is doing well in Bucks County and he is favored for re-election next year.
Pennsylvania is also having legislative elections next year. Find out who your legislators are. If they are Dems, help them get re-elected. If they are MAGA Republicans, work to defeat them. This link will tell you who your legislators are. It is good for all 50 states.
Find Your Legislators
Look your legislators up by address or use your current location.
Contact your county or state Democratic Party and ask how you can help elect more Dems to the legislature.
One-on-one precinct work is the only guaranteed way to get around broligarch social media. Field work in your community will trump Musk and Zuck on Election Day.
Now he needs to ensure an electoral win that translates into tangible improvements in people’s lives
The lesson from the NYC mayoral primary is not complicated. Voters will support politicians who fight for them.
Zohran Mamdani’s triumph in New York City’s Democratic primary represents more than just an electoral upset. It’s a confirmation that progressive politics, when pursued with discipline, vision, and vigor, can resonate broadly – even in a city known for its entrenched power structures.
[ ... ]
Mamdani, a 33-year-old legislator from Queens, ran a relentlessly disciplined campaign built around cost-of-living issues, zeroing in on essentials such as housing, transport, childcare and groceries. Repeated attempts to define Mamdani as merely a “Muslim socialist” with radical ideas, to force divisive identity politics to the fore, or to make the election a referendum on Israel, failed.
But it wasn’t simply messaging discipline that made Mamdani successful. Mamdani has a political talent rooted in genuine charisma. His fluency with language, clarity of purpose, and authenticity allowed him to speak convincingly to voters from many different backgrounds. He wasn’t just another activist-politician; he proved himself to be a natural leader – someone capable of communicating moral truths without sounding moralistic.
Of course it helps if you're a good candidate. Zohran ran an excellent campaign.
The difference in campaign styles was stark and instructive. Mamdani’s campaign was fundamentally grassroots, driven by committed volunteers, including young activists from the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). It was also modern and intelligent, recognizing that an ever-growing share of the electorate forms its opinions through social media and finding innovative ways to communicate policy proposals. Remarkably, almost one quarter of the early vote in this primary came from first-time voters in New York elections.
Yet the results make clear that his voting base wasn’t limited to young, college-educated voters most engaged by his campaign. Notably, Mamdani succeeded in neighborhoods like Bay Ridge, Bensonhurst, Dyker Heights, Sunset Park, and Brighton Beach — all areas that swung rightward in the 2024 presidential election.
Fear mongering is sooooo 2024.
Voters, for their part, proved that they were ready for change. They refused to succumb to cynical fearmongering about a supposed tide of crime and antisemitism that would come from a Mamdani victory. Instead, they took a clear-eyed look at their lives, assessed the failings of the Democratic party, and chose something fresh, new, and fundamentally different over a failed political establishment.
Strictly speaking, the ranked choice results won't be known until next Tuesday. But Andrew Cuomo would not have conceded unless he was 100% sure that he lost.
