Zohran Mamdani’s surprise victory in last month’s New York City Democratic Mayoral primary has raised two important questions that may impact the direction of the Democratic Party, and thus American politics.
First, does Mamdani’s win offer definitive proof of the power of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, or was it a relative fluke due to circumstances too unique to be replicated in other cities, states, or on the national level?
Second, as it relates to California specifically, will Mamdani’s victory boost a progressive movement that has seen voters increasingly reject it in recent years?
To be sure, there are legitimate arguments for both sides of these questions.
Indeed, Mamdani not only won, but, in receiving 56% of the final vote, soundly defeated the competition led by former Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
Moreover, the 33 year old state Assemblyman was carried to victory by an extremely diverse coalition, winning Asian voters (+15), Hispanic voters (+6), and White voters (+5) according to an analysis by the New York Times.
Similarly, the winning formula behind Mamdani’s campaign – savvy use of social media – is not particularly hard for other progressive candidates to replicate.
All of this has emboldened progressives across the country.
Common Sense, a progressive news outlet, has declared that Mamdani’s win proves the need for Democrats to welcome the rise of socialists within the party and the start of a total shakeup of the party to give more influence to the far-left.
Conversely, there are reasons to believe that, rather than underscoring the dominance and appeal of progressives, Mamdani’s victory could simply be chalked up to a perfect storm of circumstances that are not present in other elections.
Mamdani’s top challenger, Cuomo, had spent a decade as governor of New York and was seen as the establishment candidate at a time when 69% of voters say the Democratic establishment is “out of touch” per Washington Post polling.
Further, New York City itself is idiosyncratic, giving Mamdani a base that may not exist, at least to this scale, elsewhere.
New York City Democratic primary voters tend to be considerably further to the political left than one would see in other states or on the national level, including a heavy concentration of young, college-educated, and progressive voters.
According to a post-election survey from SurveyUSA, “very liberal” voters (32%) made up the biggest share of primary voters.
This compares to data from Gallup which indicates that less 1-in-10 (9%) voters nationwide consider themselves “very liberal.”
Put another way, it’s difficult to imagine Mamdani’s self-described Democratic Socialist agenda being received as well in purple districts in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, or Georgia.
In that same vein, assuming Mamdani wins the general election, how he governs will severely impact the fortunes of progressives across the country.
If his more extreme policies cause the city financial distress, capital flight, or a breakdown in public safety, any enthusiasm he’s generated thus far for progressive leadership will rapidly evaporate.
Of course, the flip side is that if anger towards the Trump administration grows over issues like deportations, tariffs, or other executive overreach, it may further embolden progressives.
Or, given the far-left’s tendency to be the most vocal contingent of the Democratic Party, and the most willing to voice opposition to Trump, it may make their candidates look more appealing to Americans turned off by the administration.
The second question that arises from Mamdani’s win is whether it translates into renewed strength for progressives in California, or even the possibility of a far-left candidate making their mark on the upcoming gubernatorial election.
As the biggest solidly blue state in the country, California politics are often further to the left of other states, but in recent years, progressives have seen their influence wane.
However, progressives there are viewing Mamdani’s win as a “harbinger” of things to come, according to a recent Politico article.
And yet, there are signs that Californians may not be ready to return to progressive governance.
Consider San Francisco, a former bastion of the state’s far-left. Just three years ago, voters recalled District Attorney Chesa Boudin, amid mounting exhaustion with progressive criminal justice policies. Then last year, the city elected centrist Democrat Daniel Lurie as mayor, doubling down on a shift towards the center and away from progressive candidates.
At the same time, the 2024 election showed a considerable shift to the right among California voters.
Former Vice President Kamala Harris’ 20-point margin of victory over President Trump was the smallest for a Democrat since 2004, and Trump flipped 10 counties that had voted for former President Biden in 2020.
The state’s voters also passed Prop 36, reinstituting tough-on-crime laws.
With that in mind, is it possible that a reinvigorated progressive wing will impact the gubernatorial election?
At this point, none of the declared candidates could be considered as far-left as Mamdani, but there is one critical factor: Kamala Harris.
The former VP leads most polls, including a recent UC Irvine survey showing her 15-points ahead of 2nd place Rick Caruso (24% to 9%).
But, if Harris does not run – she has yet to decide – the race could theoretically be wide open for a progressive candidate.
Ultimately, the Democratic Party remains at a crossroads, caught between the growing influence of the far-left, and the more politically viable moderate wing.
Whether or not Mamdani’s victory heralds a new era of a progressive-dominated Democratic Party remains to be seen, but it is far too early to declare a widespread desire for similar candidates.
Douglas Schoen is a longtime Democratic political consultant.