I think it was a case of Pablos being a more known entity versus GOJ. In addition to previously serving as the head of the local Chamber of Commerce, he served on numerous boards and commissions in San Antonio, so the powers that be likely knew him from those interactions.
The other side of that coin, I'd say GOJ's outsider status was also a factor. She'll be the first mayor since Phil Hardberger (2005-2009), with no previous city council experience. You could also argue that Hardberger wasn't a complete outsider since he had been appointed and elected to the 4th Court of Appeals, which covers all of Bexar County, from 1994-2003. To find a mayor with no previous city council experience or even holding elective office, you'd have to go back to before San Antonio's current system of electing mayors and city council. Doing a cursory glance, I had to back to the 1950s to find such an instance.
From April but good and short read about how in Paris air pollution fell substantially as the city restricted car traffic and made way for parks and bike lanes.
Former gubernatorial candidate Cynthia Nixon said this about State Senator Jessica Ramos's surprise decision to endorse Andrew Cuomo for mayor of New York: "I’m choosing to remember the Jessica Ramos who ran to break up the IDC, supported the women who were sexually harassed, remembered the people Cuomo sent to die in nursing homes & always called out Cuomo’s corruption, mismanagement & lies. I’ll miss that Ramos, where did she go?💔" https://x.com/CynthiaNixon/status/1930972970370879645
This is just bizarre to me. I don't really know Ramos, but an anti-IDC primary winner who called for Cuomo's resignation as governor and is still actively running for mayor endorses the guy? WTF is going on here?
Go from outsider calling truth to power to being a deadbeat lackey groveling to the very person you initially stood up to? Just to pay off the debts from her failing campaign? That's pretty pathetic.
Like, John Kasich was a right wing dick when he first came to Congress in the 90s, it took decades for him to emerge as the "moderate" voice in the 2016 primary.
At least publicly, he seems more measured and less brash than he did in the 90s. Far as I'm concerned, he definitely changed when he saw that temporal moderation was good for his brand during and after that 2016 Presidential run.
Same thing with him being [edit: spoken positively of] by Gillibrand. She's built her entire senate career on trying to reduce sexual harassment and worse. Now she endorses the guy who was forced out of the governor's office for sexual harassment.
The only ways to make it make sense speak poorly for both Gillibrand and Ramos.
Official endorsement isn't the point here to me, staying "neutral" is the problem. Anyone who called for Cuomo's resignation as governor should be opposed to his race for NYC mayor, full stop. It's not that complicated.
Fully agree. But it was worth me correcting my statement!
I cannot fathom the lack of shame that Gillibrand et al need to have to fail to oppose him. Even if he wins election as mayor he cannot pose any political threat to them. There's no true risk for sticking with their basic principles. The requisite cravenness to act this way paints a horrible look.
Even worse, I expect none of them to see any kind of professional consequences for this.
Gillibrand has never really believed in much of anything. She went from being a blue dog in the House to one of the most liberal Democrats in the Senate just to stop people from primarying her.
What's so disappointing is that they wouldn't face any professional consequences for opposing Cuomo either, particularly an entrenched Senate incumbent like Gillibrand. She could endorse and campaign for any of his opponents and even if Cuomo becomes mayor, Gillibrand would certainly win her own reelection.
Sounds like politics to me. He’s clearly going to win, he’s going to be powerful and have a national profile. Ish. If I were them I’d keep my mouth shut but if NYC wants to vote for a shithead, it’s kind of hard to say, “Nooooo, I’ll stand against my constituents and make this not happen.” Don’t blame the politicians, blame New Yorkers.
If only I could go back in time and tell 20 year old me, “New York is going to be a constant disappointment.” Oh, the horror to get so into redistricting and map making only to find out Democrats don’t really do that.
MO-02: Former Cardinals pitcher and MLB on Fox announcer Adam Wainwright could be the Democratic nominee. I'd love to see Waino run as a Dem for MO-02.
If he's actually interested, seems like a good recruit. Professional athletes/coaches are generally solid candidates because they have public relations experience, but someone like Wainwright who played for almost 20 years for the same team is on a different level.
Only considering that no-one better is likely to become Speaker. At least he's an excellent public speaker who rhymes better than any other politician.
The point, of course, isn’t just Jeffries as Speaker, but Democrats in control of the House – able to control committees, force real budget negotiations, launch investigations, hold damning public hearings...
Because of what? You're that certain he could get an order to cancel court proceedings sustained by force? I hope we don't find out, but it's uncertain how that kind of uncharted territory would be handled.
I understand that many may think this district is too conservative to elect a Democrat, and it honestly probably is. But in this type of toxic environment, it's the right conditions for a Democrat upset, much as Conor Lamb did in the old PA 18th, albeit in a special election. If somehow a special election is allowed here I could reasonably see an upset, especially considering Lamb won in the even more conservative PA 18th, which was R +11, as opposed to TN 7th, which is slightly less red with R +10. Either way it should be a great opportunity to recruit new candidates and increase Democrat visibility and networking in redder areas.
Tennessee law requires a special election to be called within 10 days of the vacancy occurring. Primaries must be held 55-60 days after the election is called, and the general held 100-107 days after the vacancy. I agree it's worth going for, especially since under those stipulaions it will be occuring this year
They know what’s coming and are getting out of dodge before they lose their power to get a plum promotion before the coming demotion by voters. How many big companies want to hire a minority representative backbencher compared to a committee chair? Irrespective of political party. Time for them to maximize their chances is now. Wouldn’t be shocked if this drip became a trickle of R’s leaving.
One other note, he’s only 60 and only been in congress for 6 years, so this is purely a “save my own hide” move from him instead of a real “hang it up” retirement. Republicans often talked him up as a rising star with his veteran credentials. He was also a part of Trump’s Tennessee political team in the 2024 campaign, so this has to also be viewed as a blow against Trump and what he thinks of his presidency so far, otherwise he’d stay and continue his climb in the GOP ranks.
Andy Ogles is even younger at 53 and in the even less red 5th district. He's been quite sloppy recently too and had the FBI raid his home over campaign irregularities as recent as 2024. Overall Nashville, and apparently much of Tennessee, has been growing lately, in large part due to younger and more educated professionals moving in due to the better job opportunities and lower costs of living. Nashville apparently is among the fastest growing US cities and it's metro alone is expected to swell over 1.4 million by 2030. If anywhere there's an example of a dummymander that can blow up in the GOP's faces, it's in Tennessee with the 5th and 7th.
I am perhaps being too optimistic about my projections, but the 5th and 7th should be winnable districts for Democrats by 2030. And I mean winnable as in outside of being reach districts in favorable wave years. It's notable that in the 2018 senate contest, Phil Bredesen narrowly won the 5th under 2022 lines and his result for the 7th was 50/50, not sure if it was using those lines too. Those are ideal best case scenario numbers, but if the local TN Democratic party actually took the time to invest and engage in the voters and the demographics continue shifting in our favor, notably the large migration shift of younger people and professionals, things should improve.
New Jersey voters have already cast 466,681 votes in the 2025 primary election, including 333,294 Democrats and 133,294 Republicans, in advance of the election through Sunday, according to an analysis by Ryan Dubicki, an Associated Press election researcher.
That brings the turnout so far for Democrats to 13.6% and 8% for Republicans. Those numbers don’t include previously unaffiliated voters who declared a party affiliation by voting in the primary.
I don't see Mamdani winning in a 10% Jewish city, mostly because of an issue we can't discuss here but unfortunately, also due to prejudice against Muslims that goes beyond the Jewish community. And that's before considering his positions as a socialist.
Maybe. But as it stands it looks like the overwhelming majority of situations where Cuomo loses the primary are ones where Mamdani wins it. So everyone opposed to Cuomo has to hope that you're being too pessimistic.
The Honan Strategy Group survey of 412 likely Jewish voters in the June 24 Democratic primary, conducted May 15 through May 18, shows Cuomo with 31% of support and Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist who supports boycotting Israel, with 20%. Lander, who is Jewish, is in third place with 18%. The other Jewish candidate, Scott Stringer, has 5%, behind Council Speaker Adrienne Adams with 8%.
Meanwhile, some Hasidic sects today offered a first rank endorsement of Adrienne Adams, with Myrie second--and nobody else, at least not specifically ranked.
It's easy to see why they'd refuse to vote for or rank Mamdani, for reasons including those you listed. Regarding Cuomo, maybe they're still pissed about his COVID policies and protocols?
I can’t shake this sneaky gut feeling that the anti-Cuomo vote (because he reminds Democrats of Trump) will lineup for anyone, including Mamdani because he’s fresh, new and something different even if the voters who vote for him are far less progressive then he is. I also think the idea of Cuomo is a lot more appealing until the time to cast ballots comes and voters must ask themselves if they really want to go backwards again to a former politician in the time of Trump being president.
Democratic primary voters aren’t really looking for “same old” right now anywhere in the country. And if anyone in New York other than Trump is “same old” it’s definitely the former long time Governor Cuomo. We’ll see what happens soon enough, but I think the “different and new” Democrats are going to have a lot of success in primaries to come for this year’s elections and the midterms and possibly even the presidential race in 2028.
If Mamdani does beat Cuomo and does become mayor of a very heavily minority city like NYC (lot of ifs I know), you can bet Democrats will take notice of his progressive economics proposals and the voices in the party advocating for Democrats becoming more populist left wing on the economy will get very loud, as they should because if Democrats can turnout out Obama minority base voters and keep the educated suburbs, the party suddenly doesn’t have much problems winning any swing state anymore like they did in 2024.
Why do you figure on Cuomo reminding New Yorkers of Trump? The Cuomo family has been involved in city and state politics for decades. I take the rest of your points, but it remains to be seen how much Democratic voters in New York are going to favor younger candidates over established ones. Let's analyze elections _after_ they happen.
Because he literally is Trump. He’s brash, he does whatever he wants to whoever he wants, he never apologizes and he made the deep blue state of New York have Republican control for a decade. The only place he isn’t Trump is with his wealth.
I was wrong on almost everything in 2024. I could very well be wrong again. I’m not measuring drapes, just sharing a gut feeling I can’t seem to shake and it’s the same deep emotional vibe I couldn’t shake in 2024, that I went against because of all the normal political signs that showed it was Harris who was going to win (fundraising, polls, volunteers, ads, focus groups etc).
I’m not making that mistake again. Feel free to ridicule me or bring it up if I get egg on my face, we’ll find out regardless soon enough either way in any case.
Trump lost New York 3 times in a row, so if Cuomo reminded us so much of Trump, he would get drubbed. He's an asshole, but he isn't Trump. A lot of politicians have been like Cuomo.
Mamdani is an inexperienced 33 year old proposing unworkable policies. If he does become elected, the likely path is massive unpopularity, like New York's last two clown mayors, who were from opposite ends of the spectrum. I don't see a huge upside to it
I never said anything about what I think happens after Mamdani becomes mayor (if he does) or whether I think it’s a good thing just fyi. Bill De Blasio all over again is the most likely outcome after getting elected, but as we’ve seen, “willing to vote for” because they don’t like the opponent is a much bigger pool of diverse ideological voters than those who actually match up to a politician’s policies and/or like what the politician does once elected into that office.
Those are separate and completely different arguments and ones I’m absolutely not making. To be clear: I’m talking solely about him being elected in the first place and nothing about what happens after the election (good or bad).
One thing my father pointed out to me that I never really had a good answer for is why does the state pay for primary elections? Political parties are private organizations and whatever process they choose to use to pick nominees in the general election shouldn't really be paid for by the taxpayers, right?
I think this comes down to practicality. Whatever voting jurisdiction will run a single voting day as the primary for all parties that wish to participate because even though seemingly everyone hates it, our political system is one dominated by partisanship.
Some places hold the equivalent of a non-partisan primary: everyone on the first ballot then a top two after, often with no party affiliation listed. I think that's how it worked for San Antonio's recent mayoral election. Boston does the same.
Trump’s political team is encouraging Republican leaders in Texas to examine how House district lines in the state could be redrawn ahead of next year’s midterm elections to try to save the party’s endangered majority, according to people in Texas and Washington who are familiar with the effort.
Very happy that GOJ won in San Antonio!
Especially when many "establishment Democrats" did their best to hurt her campaign.
With friends like these...you know the rest.
What was going on there?
I think it was a case of Pablos being a more known entity versus GOJ. In addition to previously serving as the head of the local Chamber of Commerce, he served on numerous boards and commissions in San Antonio, so the powers that be likely knew him from those interactions.
The other side of that coin, I'd say GOJ's outsider status was also a factor. She'll be the first mayor since Phil Hardberger (2005-2009), with no previous city council experience. You could also argue that Hardberger wasn't a complete outsider since he had been appointed and elected to the 4th Court of Appeals, which covers all of Bexar County, from 1994-2003. To find a mayor with no previous city council experience or even holding elective office, you'd have to go back to before San Antonio's current system of electing mayors and city council. Doing a cursory glance, I had to back to the 1950s to find such an instance.
From April but good and short read about how in Paris air pollution fell substantially as the city restricted car traffic and made way for parks and bike lanes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2025/04/12/air-pollution-paris-health-cars/
Former gubernatorial candidate Cynthia Nixon said this about State Senator Jessica Ramos's surprise decision to endorse Andrew Cuomo for mayor of New York: "I’m choosing to remember the Jessica Ramos who ran to break up the IDC, supported the women who were sexually harassed, remembered the people Cuomo sent to die in nursing homes & always called out Cuomo’s corruption, mismanagement & lies. I’ll miss that Ramos, where did she go?💔" https://x.com/CynthiaNixon/status/1930972970370879645
This is just bizarre to me. I don't really know Ramos, but an anti-IDC primary winner who called for Cuomo's resignation as governor and is still actively running for mayor endorses the guy? WTF is going on here?
Money? Ramos failed to qualify for matching funds, and her campaign faces hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines for campaign finance violations.
Go from outsider calling truth to power to being a deadbeat lackey groveling to the very person you initially stood up to? Just to pay off the debts from her failing campaign? That's pretty pathetic.
That's the lifecycle for a lot of politicians. Most insiders were once outsiders yelling to be let in. This particular case is pretty blatant though.
Right, the turnaround is just so jarring.
Like, John Kasich was a right wing dick when he first came to Congress in the 90s, it took decades for him to emerge as the "moderate" voice in the 2016 primary.
I'm not sure if Kasich actually changed. I think maybe everyone else in the party just got worse.
At least publicly, he seems more measured and less brash than he did in the 90s. Far as I'm concerned, he definitely changed when he saw that temporal moderation was good for his brand during and after that 2016 Presidential run.
What do you mean by "temporal" in this context?
Same thing with him being [edit: spoken positively of] by Gillibrand. She's built her entire senate career on trying to reduce sexual harassment and worse. Now she endorses the guy who was forced out of the governor's office for sexual harassment.
The only ways to make it make sense speak poorly for both Gillibrand and Ramos.
Yeah, that's a wtf from her
Did Gillibrand endorsed Cuomo?
i don't think so.
You're right, I misremembered. She spoke positively of him but I cannot find anything indicating she officially endorsed him.
Same principle but I shouldn't have said endorsed.
Official endorsement isn't the point here to me, staying "neutral" is the problem. Anyone who called for Cuomo's resignation as governor should be opposed to his race for NYC mayor, full stop. It's not that complicated.
Fully agree. But it was worth me correcting my statement!
I cannot fathom the lack of shame that Gillibrand et al need to have to fail to oppose him. Even if he wins election as mayor he cannot pose any political threat to them. There's no true risk for sticking with their basic principles. The requisite cravenness to act this way paints a horrible look.
Even worse, I expect none of them to see any kind of professional consequences for this.
Gillibrand has never really believed in much of anything. She went from being a blue dog in the House to one of the most liberal Democrats in the Senate just to stop people from primarying her.
Works for me.
(Ok, I still want Al Franken back.)
What's so disappointing is that they wouldn't face any professional consequences for opposing Cuomo either, particularly an entrenched Senate incumbent like Gillibrand. She could endorse and campaign for any of his opponents and even if Cuomo becomes mayor, Gillibrand would certainly win her own reelection.
Not surprising. She's been an Exhibit A case study in transactionalism since she first burst onto the scene in 2006.
Sounds like politics to me. He’s clearly going to win, he’s going to be powerful and have a national profile. Ish. If I were them I’d keep my mouth shut but if NYC wants to vote for a shithead, it’s kind of hard to say, “Nooooo, I’ll stand against my constituents and make this not happen.” Don’t blame the politicians, blame New Yorkers.
If only I could go back in time and tell 20 year old me, “New York is going to be a constant disappointment.” Oh, the horror to get so into redistricting and map making only to find out Democrats don’t really do that.
Forget it Jake. It’s New York Democratic politics.
Pam Bondi’s brother lost his bid to become President of the D.C. Bar to Diane Seltzer. He only got 3490 votes while Seltzer nabbed 34,982.
https://www.thedailypoliticususa.com/p/huge-win-as-pam-bondis-brother-loses
Shellacking!
Clueless on his part to think he had a chance
He can thank his complicit sister as well as the convicted felon for that.
He has a sister who's a convicted felon? Please elaborate.
They meant his sister, and the convicted felon. Two separate people.
Sister is Pam Bondi, current US AG. Convicted felon is Trump.
I misread that.
What a wonderful measure of brand damage to the "Bondi" family name!
MO-02: Former Cardinals pitcher and MLB on Fox announcer Adam Wainwright could be the Democratic nominee. I'd love to see Waino run as a Dem for MO-02.
https://www.insideelections.com/news/article/missouri-2-cardinal-pitcher-adam-wainwright-recruited-to-challenge-ann-wagn
If he's actually interested, seems like a good recruit. Professional athletes/coaches are generally solid candidates because they have public relations experience, but someone like Wainwright who played for almost 20 years for the same team is on a different level.
Mark Green R-TN is retiring https://x.com/liz_elkind/status/1932190527660720410?s=61&t=5copDbz1aPl7ASsRCUclLg.
Resigning.
Two or three more, please!
I would like to see Hakeem Jeffries as speaker well before the 2026 elections.
Only considering that no-one better is likely to become Speaker. At least he's an excellent public speaker who rhymes better than any other politician.
The point, of course, isn’t just Jeffries as Speaker, but Democrats in control of the House – able to control committees, force real budget negotiations, launch investigations, hold damning public hearings...
Of course!
That would likely be the trigger for Trump to declare Martial Law and make himself a dictator, though-if he hasn't already done so.
He may try to do it before that, and I'm not sure we can count on the Supreme Court not to sustain it, after the bullshit they came out with on Doge.
He wouldn't even let a case challenging a declaration of martial law get that fat-no matter what the Supreme Court would rule.
Because of what? You're that certain he could get an order to cancel court proceedings sustained by force? I hope we don't find out, but it's uncertain how that kind of uncharted territory would be handled.
Excellent
I understand that many may think this district is too conservative to elect a Democrat, and it honestly probably is. But in this type of toxic environment, it's the right conditions for a Democrat upset, much as Conor Lamb did in the old PA 18th, albeit in a special election. If somehow a special election is allowed here I could reasonably see an upset, especially considering Lamb won in the even more conservative PA 18th, which was R +11, as opposed to TN 7th, which is slightly less red with R +10. Either way it should be a great opportunity to recruit new candidates and increase Democrat visibility and networking in redder areas.
This is suburban and exurban Nashville, isn't it? You definitely have to try in such a district.
Tennessee law requires a special election to be called within 10 days of the vacancy occurring. Primaries must be held 55-60 days after the election is called, and the general held 100-107 days after the vacancy. I agree it's worth going for, especially since under those stipulaions it will be occuring this year
Absolutely! The only elections Democrats are sure to lose are those where we don’t bother to run a candidate.
They know what’s coming and are getting out of dodge before they lose their power to get a plum promotion before the coming demotion by voters. How many big companies want to hire a minority representative backbencher compared to a committee chair? Irrespective of political party. Time for them to maximize their chances is now. Wouldn’t be shocked if this drip became a trickle of R’s leaving.
One other note, he’s only 60 and only been in congress for 6 years, so this is purely a “save my own hide” move from him instead of a real “hang it up” retirement. Republicans often talked him up as a rising star with his veteran credentials. He was also a part of Trump’s Tennessee political team in the 2024 campaign, so this has to also be viewed as a blow against Trump and what he thinks of his presidency so far, otherwise he’d stay and continue his climb in the GOP ranks.
Andy Ogles is even younger at 53 and in the even less red 5th district. He's been quite sloppy recently too and had the FBI raid his home over campaign irregularities as recent as 2024. Overall Nashville, and apparently much of Tennessee, has been growing lately, in large part due to younger and more educated professionals moving in due to the better job opportunities and lower costs of living. Nashville apparently is among the fastest growing US cities and it's metro alone is expected to swell over 1.4 million by 2030. If anywhere there's an example of a dummymander that can blow up in the GOP's faces, it's in Tennessee with the 5th and 7th.
Even if it blows up next year, they will have gotten a couple of elections out of it.
I am perhaps being too optimistic about my projections, but the 5th and 7th should be winnable districts for Democrats by 2030. And I mean winnable as in outside of being reach districts in favorable wave years. It's notable that in the 2018 senate contest, Phil Bredesen narrowly won the 5th under 2022 lines and his result for the 7th was 50/50, not sure if it was using those lines too. Those are ideal best case scenario numbers, but if the local TN Democratic party actually took the time to invest and engage in the voters and the demographics continue shifting in our favor, notably the large migration shift of younger people and professionals, things should improve.
New Jersey voters have already cast 466,681 votes in the 2025 primary election, including 333,294 Democrats and 133,294 Republicans, in advance of the election through Sunday, according to an analysis by Ryan Dubicki, an Associated Press election researcher.
That brings the turnout so far for Democrats to 13.6% and 8% for Republicans. Those numbers don’t include previously unaffiliated voters who declared a party affiliation by voting in the primary.
https://newjerseyglobe.com/governor/n-j-has-cast-nearly-470000-votes-in-advance-of-primary-election/
Cuomo in trouble? https://x.com/ppollingnumbers/status/1932208591827554556?s=61&t=5copDbz1aPl7ASsRCUclLg
It was noted on Bluesky that that poll also predates AOC’s Mamdani endorsement. This will be interesting.
I don't see Mamdani winning in a 10% Jewish city, mostly because of an issue we can't discuss here but unfortunately, also due to prejudice against Muslims that goes beyond the Jewish community. And that's before considering his positions as a socialist.
Maybe. But as it stands it looks like the overwhelming majority of situations where Cuomo loses the primary are ones where Mamdani wins it. So everyone opposed to Cuomo has to hope that you're being too pessimistic.
I hope the race changes and a really competent, hopefully non-corrupt, reasonable candidate like Brad Lander or Adrienne Adams is able to win.
From your voice to millions of New Yorkers’ ears!
The Honan Strategy Group survey of 412 likely Jewish voters in the June 24 Democratic primary, conducted May 15 through May 18, shows Cuomo with 31% of support and Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist who supports boycotting Israel, with 20%. Lander, who is Jewish, is in third place with 18%. The other Jewish candidate, Scott Stringer, has 5%, behind Council Speaker Adrienne Adams with 8%.
https://forward.com/fast-forward/723325/cuomo-nyc-mayor-mamdani-jewish-vote/
I could see 20% of New York Jews voting for him. Maybe. Not more. And I mean in a general election.
Meanwhile, some Hasidic sects today offered a first rank endorsement of Adrienne Adams, with Myrie second--and nobody else, at least not specifically ranked.
https://x.com/jacobkornbluh/status/1932282445291778082?s=46&t=OcAyXVoOeQKOni158Mkr6g
It's easy to see why they'd refuse to vote for or rank Mamdani, for reasons including those you listed. Regarding Cuomo, maybe they're still pissed about his COVID policies and protocols?
Yeah, I could see the Chasidim being mad about that. Most of the rest of us wouldn't be.
Except that it won't be a 1-on-1 race. Did they figure out all the steps in the calculation of the ranked choices?
Cuomo and Mamdani? I sincerely hope there is a way to defeat both these horrible candidates!
It seems like NYC is the main thing that is in trouble.
The whole country and human race are in trouble, but yeah, NYC politics is (are?) terrible!
I can’t shake this sneaky gut feeling that the anti-Cuomo vote (because he reminds Democrats of Trump) will lineup for anyone, including Mamdani because he’s fresh, new and something different even if the voters who vote for him are far less progressive then he is. I also think the idea of Cuomo is a lot more appealing until the time to cast ballots comes and voters must ask themselves if they really want to go backwards again to a former politician in the time of Trump being president.
Democratic primary voters aren’t really looking for “same old” right now anywhere in the country. And if anyone in New York other than Trump is “same old” it’s definitely the former long time Governor Cuomo. We’ll see what happens soon enough, but I think the “different and new” Democrats are going to have a lot of success in primaries to come for this year’s elections and the midterms and possibly even the presidential race in 2028.
If Mamdani does beat Cuomo and does become mayor of a very heavily minority city like NYC (lot of ifs I know), you can bet Democrats will take notice of his progressive economics proposals and the voices in the party advocating for Democrats becoming more populist left wing on the economy will get very loud, as they should because if Democrats can turnout out Obama minority base voters and keep the educated suburbs, the party suddenly doesn’t have much problems winning any swing state anymore like they did in 2024.
Why do you figure on Cuomo reminding New Yorkers of Trump? The Cuomo family has been involved in city and state politics for decades. I take the rest of your points, but it remains to be seen how much Democratic voters in New York are going to favor younger candidates over established ones. Let's analyze elections _after_ they happen.
Because he literally is Trump. He’s brash, he does whatever he wants to whoever he wants, he never apologizes and he made the deep blue state of New York have Republican control for a decade. The only place he isn’t Trump is with his wealth.
I was wrong on almost everything in 2024. I could very well be wrong again. I’m not measuring drapes, just sharing a gut feeling I can’t seem to shake and it’s the same deep emotional vibe I couldn’t shake in 2024, that I went against because of all the normal political signs that showed it was Harris who was going to win (fundraising, polls, volunteers, ads, focus groups etc).
I’m not making that mistake again. Feel free to ridicule me or bring it up if I get egg on my face, we’ll find out regardless soon enough either way in any case.
Trump lost New York 3 times in a row, so if Cuomo reminded us so much of Trump, he would get drubbed. He's an asshole, but he isn't Trump. A lot of politicians have been like Cuomo.
Mamdani is an inexperienced 33 year old proposing unworkable policies. If he does become elected, the likely path is massive unpopularity, like New York's last two clown mayors, who were from opposite ends of the spectrum. I don't see a huge upside to it
I never said anything about what I think happens after Mamdani becomes mayor (if he does) or whether I think it’s a good thing just fyi. Bill De Blasio all over again is the most likely outcome after getting elected, but as we’ve seen, “willing to vote for” because they don’t like the opponent is a much bigger pool of diverse ideological voters than those who actually match up to a politician’s policies and/or like what the politician does once elected into that office.
Those are separate and completely different arguments and ones I’m absolutely not making. To be clear: I’m talking solely about him being elected in the first place and nothing about what happens after the election (good or bad).
One thing my father pointed out to me that I never really had a good answer for is why does the state pay for primary elections? Political parties are private organizations and whatever process they choose to use to pick nominees in the general election shouldn't really be paid for by the taxpayers, right?
I think this comes down to practicality. Whatever voting jurisdiction will run a single voting day as the primary for all parties that wish to participate because even though seemingly everyone hates it, our political system is one dominated by partisanship.
Some places hold the equivalent of a non-partisan primary: everyone on the first ballot then a top two after, often with no party affiliation listed. I think that's how it worked for San Antonio's recent mayoral election. Boston does the same.
Trump’s political team is encouraging Republican leaders in Texas to examine how House district lines in the state could be redrawn ahead of next year’s midterm elections to try to save the party’s endangered majority, according to people in Texas and Washington who are familiar with the effort.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/09/us/politics/trump-texas-redistricting.html