How Democrats Unforgivably Squandered the Mamdani Moment
Schumer and Jeffries had virtually nothing to lose — and everything to gain — by endorsing Mamdani
Polls continue to show New York Assembly Member Zohran Mamdani (D-NY) with a massive lead in next month’s New York City mayoral election. But even if Mamdani wins, Democrats should be enraged at how party leaders have wasted a massive opportunity to win untold benefits for the party and the country.
What might have happened if Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) — both from New York City — had endorsed Mamdani right on the heels of his stunning, galvanizing, national-news-making primary victory?
First but not foremost, they could have preserved Vote Blue No Matter Who instead of killing it. Time and again, Democratic leaders have rallied progressives to back centrist, accommodationist, corporate Democrats when it mattered: At the polls.
But now, party leaders won’t say whether voters should back a Democratic nominee at the polls. And so they’ve jettisoned the mantra they once wielded to morally coerce progressive support.
Vote Blue No Matter Who is now gone. Great job.
Here’s exclusive video of progressives the next time centrists cry Vote Blue No Matter Who:
Second and foremost, Schumer and Jeffries and other Democratic Party leaders have unforgivably squandered a massive opportunity to protect the entire party on its left flank and defang the perennial Republican weapon of “socialism/communism/Trotskyism/whateverism.”
Schumer and Jeffries could have pointed out that Mamdani was nominated in a city that routinely elects at least one Republican member of Congress and not that long ago elected Republican mayors.
They could have used blowback as a teachable moment to educate voters that everything Mamdani’s proposing is being done or tried in more conservative areas right now, or has been a success in the past.
In fact, Mamdani’s policies only hurt him and Democrats in the abstract. The phrase, “Well, I was gonna vote for Mamdani but then I found out he wants to open a grocery store that doesn’t make me subsidize executive bonuses, so now I’m a Cuomo man” has never been uttered anywhere in the history of everything, including fanfic and excluding only the editorial pages of the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and current Washington Post.
A lot of people out there believe the crap about Democrats being socialists and hating America. But many of them believe it because so many Democrats are cowardly and timid about it, Democrats who may not know that everything they say they’re fighting for was labeled socialist by Republican leaders upon its birth.
It’s modern Democratic embarrassment about policies once championed by both Presidents Roosevelt that makes those policies less popular today.
Media treat those policies, and their champions, accordingly because Democratic leadership reflects (or shares) this timidity. Democratic Party leadership is more hesitant and timorous about its left flank than Republicans are about their right flank, a flank which, it’s worth noting, is insane.
Think how crazy that is. Democrats have no equivalent rhetorically or politically of the thundering rhetorical imbecility and policy nihilism/theocracy on the right. And yet still Democratic leaders are more afraid of their own “extremists” (advocates for European-style health care) than Republicans are of their extremists (advocates for banning divorce, stoning LGBTQ+ people and stripping citizenship based on speech).
In other words, it’s Democratic Party leadership who give power to the perennial right-wing claims of socialism and the “radical left” of Donald Trump’s fever dreams.
With Mamdani, Schumer and Jeffries could have landed a real blow ending this timidity within the entire party, by taking a page from Mamdani and responding with pride rather than remorse, confidence instead of contrition.
Imagine if Schumer or Jeffries had endorsed Mamdani soon after his nomination — or even before! This would have signaled Big-Tent-itude to the media and the Democratic establishment.
It would have been a huge opportunity to nudge the Overton Window at least a little bit leftward — which would’ve been easy after months of Trump self-cratering his popularity and agenda.
Neither Schumer nor Jeffries would have had to endorse any particular plank of Mamdani’s any more than if they endorse Democratic candidates who oppose reproductive rights, as Jeffries has.
Schumer and Jeffries could have celebrated, capitalized on, and amplified the youthful joy around Mamdani’s candidacy and his policies. They could have held him and his ideas up as models for other candidates around the country.
They could have assuaged centrist Democrats that Mamdani doesn’t hurt them by tarnishing the party, he protects them by manning the barricades, by expanding the party so that they, the centrists, can’t credibly be smeared as the next “radical fringe.”
And while Mamdani is still far ahead, he remains below 50%. It’s not crazy to think that an unflinching embrace by Democratic Party leaders — not just Schumer and Jeffries but Obamas and Clintons and others — could have lifted Mamdani above a majority, and still could. And with that mandate, Mamdani might have the political momentum to get some cooperation from Albany (where state legislators have a lot of say over what Mamdani wants to do)1.
Schumer and Jeffries could have destigmatized — for nervous centrists and inattentive independents — the progressive left around the country, by responding to Mamdani’s primary victory with their own joy and, even if they had to fake it, perfect comfort with him as a candidate.
And they could have done it all for cynical strategic imperatives! It should be obvious to any centrist Democrat that it hurts them to demonize everything an inch to their left. Why? Because that makes them just an inch from being demons.
The Democratic Party could have legitimized progressive politics and candidates to the benefit of all Democratic candidates — just a year after fundraising relentlessly by telling us any Democrat was a gift and that every other political consideration was subordinate to fighting fascism. Vote Blue No Matter Who.
Even if they endorse now, which at least Jeffries has hinted he will, it’s too late to reap every benefit they could have. Late and grudging endorsements are of little value, at least without a pretense of wild enthusiasm.
In fact, grudging endorsements are the worst of all worlds. They telegraph distaste for Mamdani while also implying a brutalist inner party leadership that demands compliance without regard to personal principle. Whoo-hoo.
And there’s something else Schumer and Jeffries are risking, too.
The Lost Mamdate
Here’s another scenario we could have had and still could have.
What if, instead of dithering and fucking around, the Democratic Party brought its full weight to bear on disgraced former Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) to drop out? Hell, they did it before, pushing him to resign as governor.
And there’s some damn precedenty precedent from the president. Trump reportedly tried to clear the field for Cuomo by enticing current Mayor Eric Adams and Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa to drop out.
Why haven’t Democrats done the same with Cuomo? They still could! Give him Schenectady, instead (sorry, Schenectady, we’ll owe you one).
Just imagine the power of a Mamdani blowout in a one-on-one contest against a Republican candidate who’s well known to New York, who embodies tough-on-crime.
New York is just two mayors removed from having elected a Republican mayor. A Mamdani blowout in that city against a well-known Republican crime-fighter would reverberate throughout the country.
Think how demoralizing that would be. The Politico quotes from terrified anonymous Republican consultants write themselves.
A Mamdani landsliwa would destigmatize progressivism even more — which benefits swing-district centrists. It would give Mamdani more political clout to get other Democrats on board with his agenda.
Remember, mayor isn’t king or even president. He literally can’t do it alone.
And if Mamdani’s policies aren’t passed or if they fail in practice, there’s a good chance it won’t be for their flaws, it’ll be due to sabotage and undermining by other Democrats with motive to see Mamdani fail. Mamdani needs state lawmakers. He needs the City Council. All of those people would be highly motivated to help rather than hinder in the event of a Mamdani blowout.
Mamdani’s success as mayor of New York City benefits all Democrats everywhere. Just as his failure imperils them.
What If Mamdani Loses?
When Mamdani won the primary, it was by no means clear that he would still be leading this widely a month from the general election.
Trump or billionaire Paul Catsimatidis might have cleared the field for Cuomo by now and Cuomo could have squeezed past Mamdani the way he squeezes past young women who work for him.
By refusing to boost Mamdani early on, Schumer and Jeffries knew they were increasing the non-trivial odds that Cuomo, Adams, or potentially even Sliwa could win in the general. Here’s what they were risking:
The party loses control of the nation’s biggest city.
The party loses an election in the nation’s biggest city.
The party’s nominee loses.
The Democrat Trump wants to lose loses.
Obviously, any Democrat who inflicts Cuomo on New York City deserves a special place in Hell’s Kitchen. Four years of that bullying, arrogant, Trump-preferred asshole, fueled not merely by standard-level Cuomo hubris, but turdo-charged by a comeback. Brrr.
More widely, think about how a Mamdani defeat — the one that Schumer and Jeffries have been willing to risk — would damage progressivism and the Democratic Party around the country.
A Mamdani defeat, a Democratic defeat, will destroy Democratic momentum going into the midterms. It’ll end the narrative about voter desperation to elect Democrats opposing Trump.
It’s not just that progressives, young and otherwise, will be demoralized and disheartened. They’ll feel alienated from and betrayed by the Democratic Party. And they’ll be right.
All of that anti-Trump energy now building with every shitty Trump action and every anti-shitty-Trump protest will be at risk in the midterm elections if Schumer and Jeffries are seen to have torpedoed a progressive candidate — and Blue No Matter Who — in New York City.
How many narrow House or even Senate races will Democrats lose because progressive voters saw Schumer and Jeffries reject a democratically nominated Democratic candidate?
If Schumer and Jeffries, congressional leaders, can risk a mayoral race and reject the wisdom of a city’s voters, what possible argument is there against Democratic voters rejecting the wisdom of congressional leaders and risking congressional races?
Possibly even worse is the ammunition Schumer and Jeffries will hand Trump and Republicans if Mamdani loses.
It’s not just that the nation will endure the horrific gyrations of Republican victory dances.
A Mamdani defeat would give Republicans something vastly more valuable than his victory: Something they don’t have now and won’t have without it. A Mamdani defeat would be seen as proof that the Democratic Party is too leftist, too radical to be trusted with power even by New York Socialist City voters.
Why?
Why risk all of this?
What did Schumer and Jeffries have to lose by endorsing Mamdani? Virtually nothing.
Let’s suppose Mamdani wins and gets a genuine shot at implementing his agenda and it fails or he truly fucks it up. Would Schumer and Jeffries have owned that?
Newsfucker, they would not. How come? For one thing, as you may recall, the past isn’t a thing anymore.
Schumer, after all, endorsed Adams four years ago, after his primary victory, on Aug. 3, 2021. In fact, the Democratic establishment flocked to Adams just to brush the robe of his wisdom.
The New York Times headlined: “Why Top Democrats Are Listening to Eric Adams Right Now.” Adams was taking meetings with top national Democrats at their request.
So has any one of them, including Schumer, paid any price for endorsing a corrupt mayor who ended up selling out his city to Trump? If you thought they might, have you met the media? (I can’t even find whether Jeffries endorsed Adams in the 2021 general election, that’s how past the past is.)
Even if someone did try to hang Mamdani’s hypothetical New York City hellscape on them, Schumer and Jeffries would still have a perfect Get Out of Jail Free card. They could simply explain that they endorsed Mamdani because Mamdani was … the Democratic Party nominee! He was the choice of his party and they are the leaders of the party that fights for democracy!
In fact, if Schumer and Jeffries had endorsed him already, then regardless of how a victorious Mamdani performed as mayor, Schumer and Jeffries could parade their endorsements as proof of their commitment to Vote Blue No Matter Who.
Even under a Terrible Mayor Mamdani, they could, perversely, argue that they are so committed to Vote Blue No Matter Who that they endorsed him despite their many many misgivings. That’s how much they love democracy.
And that would give them leverage and credibility to get progressives on board with centrist candidates.
So…why? Why not just endorse Mamdani?
Prepare for disappointment, Newsfuckers. Obviously, I don’t know why. And unfortunately, whatever “access” to internal politics our corporate media have, it doesn’t include the dynamics behind Schumer and Jeffries withholding their endorsements. Or corporate media aren’t asking.
Either way, we don’t know.
But it may help to consider a structural aspect of their jobs that’s often elided in corporate political coverage.
Congressional leaders are not leaders in the sense of generals commanding the troops.
House and Senate leaders are a combination of spokesperson and lightning rod. It is Schumer’s and Jeffries’ job to protect their members.
Not to sacrifice any on the battlefield. Not to dispatch some as decoys. Protect them all.
I’ve written before about how this dynamic may have played out in the first shutdown battle — where there seemed to be evidence that Schumer was taking the heat for Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY).
Well, Gillibrand also hasn’t endorsed Mamdani. In fact, she shat on him and boosted the Islamophobic Republican narrative against him. (Yes, she apologized. Neato.)
Also not endorsing Mamdani: Reps. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and Laura Gillen (D-NY). Never mind that most New York City representatives have — including elder statesman Jerry Nadler (D-NY), who’s Jewish — doing what every Democratic should have, lifting Mamdani up.
So it’s conceivable that Schumer and Jeffries didn’t want to come right out of the gate in a way that would put pressure on some of the congressional Democrats who elected them. That’s a real argument, but it’s also a doody argument, because Schumer and Jeffries haven’t protected their centrist, swing-district members — they’ve just endorsed the Republican canard that the entire party is toxic and Marxist.
One mistake that too many Democratic voters make is to think of legislators as leaders. As in, leading the people, leading a movement, fighting for change.
Typically, when their ads tell you they fought for something, it means they pressed a yea or nay button when it came time to vote on it.
Most legislators are not leaders. They’re office-holders. They fight for holding their office. If voters are active, legislators follow their voters. If voters aren’t active enough, legislators follow their donors.
Most don’t see their job as leading public opinion. They see their job as following it.
That’s why (I’m guessing) Schumer and Jeffries are willing to risk not just this race but the consequences for the party and even themselves (imagine the progressive fury against those two if Mamdani loses). They’re fighting to hold their leadership positions.
Real democracy comes when the people elect fighters. When representatives are elected by but also driven every day by the activism of their constituents. Mobilizing. Organizing. Educating. Championing boring policy and faceless bureaucrats who will make life better for everyone.
Which means it’s on us, the way it was always intended to be. If we want fighters who will fight for other fighters, it starts with us.
How We Fight
It’s pretty prosaic, but it’s mostly just talking. Tell other people about Mamdani, why you support him. Why you support his policies.
You can even join the campaign, so your talking is strategic, in line with what the campaign is doing. In fact, I went to the campaign website so I could post different ways you can get involved and I. Was. Blown. Away.
Newsfuckers, I couldn’t find a donate button.
There might be one on a pop-up the first time you load the page, but nothing on the home page itself. Amazing, right? So what is there?
And, by the way, those endorsements include members of Congress from around the country. If you don’t see your representative there, you can ask them why not. That’s fighting, too!
TFN creator and writer Jonathan Larsen co-created Up w/ Chris Hayes and wrote for Countdown with Keith Olbermann at MSNBC, helped launch CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360° and Air America Radio, and has also worked at The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Young Turks.
To the credit of Gov. Kathy Hochul (D-NY), she has endorsed Mamdani. Which should not be a big goddam deal considering he’s the candidate her party’s voters chose as her party’s nominee, but still deserves some credit because Schumer and Jeffries gave her cover not to, and because by choosing to endorse, she’s limited how much wiggle room she has to block Mamdani’s agenda without getting called out for it.
I'm 67, and you'd assume that I would be a Republican, or at best, a stodgy old Democrat, but I'm not. I LOVE seeing new and YOUNGER candidates for office in the Democratic Party. Candidates like Mandani excite me due to the possibilities of what could come from a win in such an election. Let's face it, Republicans, liars 24/7/365, have got the ear of A LOT of people. Between Trump being constantly in the news and in our face, with his Goebbels-like hold on the zeitgeist, and Republican members justifying all the disgusting shit they do, or try to do, there is no escaping it. And I've watched for months now, Democrats say and do almost nothing. And even when they have something to BE excited about, like Mandani, they're still silent.
Do Dems NOT realize that there are their normal core voters out here just WAITING for something to grab onto before the mid-terms? Do they honestly think that all the Democratic lemmings are going to trot down to the polls, or more likely mail in their votes by rote? I'm not. I have already sworn off EVER voting for a Republican again, but that leaves the only choice to simply not vote. And I know, I've heard all the arguments about that, hell, I made some of them in 2016 and 2020, but now I'm at a red line. Show me something to vote FOR, Dems, because voting "not Trump" just isn't cutting it anymore.
ETA: Thank you for this, Jonathan! It's overdue and true top to bottom.
Didn’t Mamdani star in a very short infomercial a few weeks ago begging people to stop sending money? That his campaign finances had met and exceeded some legal threshold?