New York City’s embrace of a socialist candidate on Tuesday night reverberated nationwide and quickly dominated the national news cycle. Although the final ranked-choice results won’t be known until next week, by Wednesday morning—with 93% of votes counted in the Big Apple’s Democratic mayoral primary—the ultra-progressive 33-year-old state representative Zohran Mamdani was leading former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo by 7.1 points. And contrary to one Gen Z pundit’s claim, the upset wasn’t simply the result of Cuomo’s out-of-touch social media team posting horizontal videos instead of vertical ones on Instagram.
Republicans see the antisemitic, anti-ICE Mamdani’s very possible victory as a great gift. They know that his radical proposals, which include free city buses, free child care, rent freezes, and city-owned grocery stores, would run the city into the ground. The Democratic Socialist, who equates capitalism to “theft,” insists these initiatives would be funded by a 2% wealth tax on the top 1% of taxpayers in the state and an increase in the state’s corporate tax rate from 7.25% to 11.5%.
Democrats also recognize that a Mamdani administration would be a disaster for the city, and this has sent party leaders into full-blown panic mode.
On Thursday, the Washington Post editorial board, in its capacity as the communications arm of the Democratic Party, published a sharply critical op-ed.
When the Washington Post declares that “Zohran Mamdani’s victory is bad for New York and the Democratic Party,” it’s effectively the Democratic National Committee speaking through its loudest megaphone. This op-ed wasn’t just an opinion piece — it was a clarion call to establishment Democrats everywhere to move heaven and earth to stop what they recognize as a political and economic disaster in the making.
Summing up the folly of Mamdani’s proposals, the editors wrote:
Such a massive minimum wage would depress low-skilled employment. His rent freeze would reduce the housing supply and decrease its quality. Cutting bus fares would leave a transit funding hole that, unless somehow filled, would erode service. Meanwhile, the grocery business operates on thin margins, and his plan for city-run stores would probably lead to fewer options, poor service and shortages, as privately run stores closed rather than try to compete with city-subsidized shops.
New Yorkers currently bear one of the heaviest tax burdens in the nation. This has already caused many wealthy individuals and corporations to flee the state. The editors note, “Mamdani’s tax plans would spur a corporate exodus and drive more rich people out of town, undermining the tax base and making existing services harder to maintain.”
The editors note that the city went through a similar crisis in the 1970s when “its government promised overgenerous public services even as its tax base fled.”
Although decades of better governance and fiscal reform have “revived New York,” the editors warned:
New York cannot take for granted its premier status among world cities. No mighty metropolis can. History is full of stories of great concentrations of people and wealth that decayed due to misfortune or misrule.
They pointed out that many “New Yorkers rationalized voting for Mamdani by noting the city council and the state government would constrain him.” [But can they?]
In desperation, they write, if Mamdani prevails in November, “Gov. Kathy Hochul can lead the way in containing him, not least so he does not define their party.”
Here’s a reality check for them. Reliance on Hochul to be a moderate who will help rein in Mamdani’s most progressive impulses won’t work. Hochul is not a moderate. She supports every liberal cause.
Last June, the “moderate” governor abruptly paused the start date of Manhattan’s deeply unpopular “congestion pricing tolls,” citing “facts on the ground” such as “economic concerns, including high inflation and post-pandemic vacancy rates in Manhattan office buildings.”
[Note: This program would force drivers entering the city south of 60th Street to fork over $9 for the privilege, or $2,300 per year for those driving into the city five days a week. The program would instead go into effect on Jan. 5.]
But in reality, her decision came after a talk with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY). Knowing how unpalatable congestion pricing was (and is) with voters, Jeffries was concerned this issue would hurt the party’s chances of winning back control of the House in November.
Mayors also make some decisions unilaterally. And supported by a super progressive city council, Mamdani will be able to force through all or most of his planned agenda.
This op-ed was a call to arms.
Whether this runaway freight train can still be stopped is anyone’s guess. But one thing is certain: party leaders will pull every lever of power, money, and influence to try. A Mamdani mayoralty wouldn’t just be a local experiment gone wrong — it would become a national cautionary tale, a stain on the progressive movement that could haunt it for decades to come.
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on LinkedIn or X.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY