Read about the tickets on which they ran. Blomberg ran on a ticket not dissimilar to Mandami, Giuliani was elected during a massive rise in crime (and watched it plummet) and Eric Adams won as a democrat.
You could also look at the city precinct votes in the election, huge swathes were Kamala +80 which is absurd. On the island itself, I can’t find a district lower than Kamala at +35.
So yes, we’ve found the winning ticket in a place that would’ve elected Kamala by a landslide, why on Earth would we think that is an example for the country.
Mainly because he’s doing something markedly different than the politics that lost the 2024 election for Harris. He’s showed that politics isn’t the simplistic, one-dimensional left-right spectrum that Democrats seem to cling to. Specifically, he’s promised a government that works for people, and delivered. It’s not hard to see why people will actually come out and vote for that over the “we can’t do anything, but chip in some more” messaging.
To paraphrase: And yet he won. In a city that’s not particularly liberal.
That doesn’t really make sense under the left-right paradigm, under which he’s too far left and should lose the centrists. There’s something else going on that this paradigm does not capture, and DSA candidates are doing well all over.
Exactly. Mamdami pulled off a win in one of the more liberal cities in America.
It’s like saying Ron DeSantis has given Republicane am exact pathway on how to win elections and keep voters happy.
New York is one of the more liberal cities? Three names: Rudy Giuliani, Michael Bloomberg, and Eric Adams (has been a Republican).
Meanwhile, Houston has had a Democrat in office since 1982. Chicago? Since 1931. Milwaukee’s most popular mayor (Daniel Hoan) was a socialist.
Read about the tickets on which they ran. Blomberg ran on a ticket not dissimilar to Mandami, Giuliani was elected during a massive rise in crime (and watched it plummet) and Eric Adams won as a democrat.
You could also look at the city precinct votes in the election, huge swathes were Kamala +80 which is absurd. On the island itself, I can’t find a district lower than Kamala at +35.
So yes, we’ve found the winning ticket in a place that would’ve elected Kamala by a landslide, why on Earth would we think that is an example for the country.
Those are pretty typical numbers for cities. That doesn’t indicate that NYC is unusually liberal.
… And yet trump won the popular vote.
So why on Earth can anyone say with a straight face “Mamdani has given an exact pathway on how to win elections.”
Unless they only mean municipal elections, which is not at all what OP is implying.
Mainly because he’s doing something markedly different than the politics that lost the 2024 election for Harris. He’s showed that politics isn’t the simplistic, one-dimensional left-right spectrum that Democrats seem to cling to. Specifically, he’s promised a government that works for people, and delivered. It’s not hard to see why people will actually come out and vote for that over the “we can’t do anything, but chip in some more” messaging.
You liking what Mamdani is doing does not mean it is a path to electoral victory.
Mamdani’s margin was much smaller than Harris’s, what is the evidence that he’s suddenly significantly more popular than when he barely won?
Edit: rephrased from count to margin (pres election should have a higher turnout)
To paraphrase: And yet he won. In a city that’s not particularly liberal.
That doesn’t really make sense under the left-right paradigm, under which he’s too far left and should lose the centrists. There’s something else going on that this paradigm does not capture, and DSA candidates are doing well all over.
He won by a smaller margin than Harris, that’s not a recipe for a general election theory.
He did lose the centrists, it’s why his margin of victory was smaller than Harris’, who was much more centrist.
In Democratic primaries and strongholds. The same is true of trumpian candidates in Republican primaries and strongholds.