A Contrarian View on NYC

Maybe, just maybe, it doesn't mean all the things people are screaming it means

I wouldn’t have voted, or even ranked, either Cuomo or Mamdani, and thus start this piece with two stipulations:

1. Cuomo is terrible. Everything about his candidacy was a horrible idea, ill-conceived as some kind of comeback tour from behavior for which he has no business getting a pass for. Furthermore he ran, by all outside appearances, an abysmal campaign that offered nothing of any real substance to voters. We live in a moment where every election is a seemingly a referendum on change, and in that environment, you couldn’t draw up a better opponent than Cuomo.

2. Mamdani ran a great campaign. Good campaigns are engaging, and speak directly to the issues voters care about. There are a lot of positions he took in the past that frankly I find abhorrent, I can’t see myself getting past, but it is clear he and his campaign did a great job centering the campaign on the affordability crisis that all of America is facing. I don’t want to take anything away from that.

Regardless of who won, there was going to be an absurd amount of commentary. It is the nature of anything that happens in New York. And because we live in a New York-centric media environment, there are plenty of takes arguing this race is a national sign we all need to learn from.

We need to hit the pause button on all that.

To restate - I am not here to suggest Mamdani didn’t run a great race. He did. I am here to suggest that New York might be one of the worst microcosm from which to make broad takeaways, and this race, like all big moments in New York, will get more attention than it deserves.

I get it: Most of the loudest media voices, and frankly, many of the loudest political pundit voices come from DC and New York. Aa result, our national media often overstate the importance of everyday things that happen there, as if it is the only place in the world anyone lives.

I don’t live in New York, but God knows I know when the weather is bad there (who can forget the 2-day, 24-hour CNN coverage of Don Lemon driving around in a NYC blizzard in 2015). In the same breath, when something significant politically happens there, we all know about it.

Take AOC’s win in the primary in 2018. Big deal? Of course. But had she knocked off an incumbent in say, St. Louis, like Rep. Wesley Bell did in 2024, it would have been a one-day story instead of leading political news for a weeks and weeks. The truth is, this primary win for Mamdani is a way bigger deal because of so much of the media is centered in New York. But that doesn't mean it is actually a big deal outside of the five boroughs.

This is not to say there aren’t lessons — or probably more accurately, reminders of what good candidates should always do, and creative tactics that should find their way into more races.

Focusing on core economic issues and less on niche social issues is the right thing to do, as is running a campaign that authentically makes a pitch to every voter. For example, I appreciate Mamdani going on platforms that were (are) run by critics and skeptics. If these are what Democrats takeaway from this race, that is a good thing.

But again, taking nothing away from the win, this is what good campaigns should always do. To the point about going directly to your skeptics, in 2008, Barack Obama held one of his largest rallies in a county in Florida that John Kerry lost by nearly 20 points — not because he was going to win there, but because every vote counts the same, regardless of where you find it. Shitty candidates, like Cuomo, retreat. Good campaigns expand their electorate.

This isn’t a new model. This is how good campaigns win. It is how progressive candidates have won in more progressive areas. It is also how more normie Democrats, like Haley Stevens and Mikie Sherrill in more swingy states, or how Andy Beshear has managed to win 3 statewide races in the red state of Kentucky. Or last night in Florida, in a primary no pundit or national media source will ever think about, a bright young candidate named RaShon Young — described to me by one friend as “aggressively normal” won a State House primary by banging on doors and talking about pocketbook issues with his voters. (Remember RaShon’s name - I think he will be around).

This race also feels uniquely New York. First of all, I don’t think that in many places, Cuomo would have been given the pass he was given by other pols. I said to more than one friend over the last week, I really don’t understand why other candidates didn’t emerge, or what the fear was of Cuomo. Cuomo deserved to lose - and I am glad New York voters were right to send him home.

At the same time, New York is set up for the modern progressive coalition. The City has a higher median income, and higher educational attainment than most — two areas where more progressive politics tend to do better. For example, on the latter, New York City’s college attainment share among Dem primary voters are 10-20 points higher than Democratic primary voters in swing states such as Michigan and North Carolina - and maybe 30 points higher than the general electorate. Looking at the Emerson Poll (the one poll that seemingly got it right), Mamdani struggled against an exceptionally flawed candidate with a lot of the same demographics that my party is currently struggling with - voters with lower incomes and voters with lower educational attainment.

And this is one of the main reasons I struggle to see the larger, transferrable meaning of Mamdani to the future of the party at large. I might see it if he had flipped the switch with voters who have turned away from us, but that isn’t what he did.

Conversely, there are Democrats who have found ways to make inroads with such voters. Successful Democrats such as the aforementioned Andy Beshear in Kentucky, or Josh Stein in North Carolina, or other interesting mayors, like Donna Deegan, who won despite a significant GOP turnout edge in Jacksonville, or even my buddy Zeb Smathers, a Democratic Mayor in a rural Republican North Carolina town all won by connecting with voters who have been rejecting Democrats.

In doing so, each won in an area where Republicans traditionally win, and we typically lose. Taken a step further, I doubt all but the most ardent of Mamdani supporters would argue - even if his campaign tactics were transferrable, that a candidate of his ideology would do as well in any of those places, just as it is fair to say, someone like Haley Stevens might struggle running in a Democratic primary in New York City.

As a hack, notwithstanding my issues with Mamdani’s worldview on a lot of issues (For one, unlike him, I think Obama was a good President), I can still admire the solid and creative race he ran.

I loved the walk through the city, their use of comedy in videos, the grassroots organizing, the interesting ads, the free-wheeling nature of the candidate, and mostly, the laser focus on actual issues that impact every day voters. For the life of me, I don’t know why more candidates don’t do these things. For example, there is a reason why Michigan Governor Whitmer ran on “fix the damn roads,” and did cute ads around potholes — stuff that voters see and feel every day matter. Mamdani leaned into it, both wisely and well.

But let us all be cautious before ascribing too much to a race where only about 14% of registered NYC Democrats actually voted for the winner, or suggesting generalized lessons on how his primary win helps the party build a broader electoral coalition come November (and beyond). When it comes to these lessons, I am far more interested in the lessons from candidates who have won partisan races in lean-red and red areas than I am what happened in Brooklyn (no offense to my friends who live in Brooklyn!).