The result of the New York primary was, unmistakably, a shock to the system of the Democratic Party establishment. Polls had put the former state governor Andrew Cuomo ahead of rabble-rousing radical Zohran Mamdani. Mamdani had a chance of causing an upset, but an outside chance.
For Mamdani to eke out a clear win not just in a top-two “trial heat”, but in the first round with other candidates, was remarkable. His primary vote outperformed Bernie Sanders in the New York City 2016 presidential primary, though the senator for Vermont admittedly was up against New York native (in Senate terms) Hillary Clinton.
In the run-up to the mayoral primary, polls overstated the share of voters over the age of 50 – the share of voters least receptive to Mamdani – by a margin of five points or more. Turnout among young voters (those under 50 – a generous characterisation of young, I grant you) was higher than analysts expected. At the same time, assumptions about how they would split, particularly among women, understated support for Mamdani.
Some polls even overstated Mamdani’s support among older voters. The old and women were badly sampled. The young were under-sampled. That is the long and short of what happened in July. And it might be an insight into what’s to come this week. The US’s younger half seems set for rebellion against the old order. And pollsters don’t know how to track it.
Whether it tracks beyond registered Democrats is unknown.
In the full mayoral election, which is tomorrow, Mamdani has a comfortable polling lead over the other candidates, though not a certain one. In an unpopular field, that’s good enough. Here is a candidate working on his base and his base alone. This may sound restrictive, but Mamdani’s base seems broader than anything a generic Democrat could come up with. Relative to his performance among Democrats, Mamdani outperforms among independents.
But can the New York mayoral race really be seen as a national bellwether? The city leans heavily Democratic. This is less a debate between Republican and Democrat, and more a contest between who best represents liberal voters in a liberal city with those “New York values” Ted Cruz once ascribed to Donald Trump.
That doesn’t mean it’s completely irrelevant to the national debate, though.
One of the best-performing figures for Democrats among independents and the unregistered nationally is that self-described (democratic) socialist, Bernie Sanders. Yet Democrats are arguing whether the party is “too liberal”, too left wing, too – inevitably – socialist. “Left-wing ideas have wrecked Democrats’ brand,” screamed a Semafor headline a few days ago, having had sight of a report from a think tank arguing just that. The report bemoans a party that over-prioritises issues such as LGBT rights, climate change and abortion in election campaigns. “The Democratic Party had better listen – for the good of our nation,” said one former representative in Illinois.
The report touches on a lot of fact. In 2024, Kamala Harris thought going hard on abortion would do well for her. But as I wrote back then, most voters’ focus was elsewhere. The pound – or dollar – in the pocket mattered more. It gave Trump the win then. And it holds up today.
But the bubble in which this whole debate is being held is getting it completely wrong, willingly or otherwise. Yes, most Americans say the party is too liberal. But the real failing isn’t that. Liberalism, sounding woke, whatever – that’s all noise. The real issue is that the Democrats are seen as too out of touch.
The report demands the party break with popular orthodoxies. But it is targeting the wrong orthodoxies. While an over-focus on minorities at the expense of attention towards the median American will alienate some, as it did for Harris in 2024, what did more damage was what this report ignores: the economic orthodoxies.
The issue that has exhausted so many voters in the West today – sending them to anyone with simpler messaging – is not, primarily, woke. It is not, primarily, climate change. It is the economic order that makes it harder for people to save and live and have a home to call their own. It’s an exhaustion with people’s efforts yielding less and less financial recompense. This is why Reform is so high in opinion polls in Britain. It’s why a coalition of trade unionists and radicals took power in Greece at the country’s lowest ebb during the eurozone crisis. And it’s what makes figures like Mamdani the front-runner in New York, and Sanders one of the better performing Democratic leaders among independents and unaffiliated voters.
Mamdani and Sanders lead because they talk primarily about the economy. Right or wrong, the problem for Democrats is not being too left wing. The problem is not being relevant to the American people.
[Further reading: Why are the Democrats so crap?]
Content from our partners
Related
