How Zohran Mamdani Fixed the Mistakes That Cost Democrats in 2024

Mamdani’s long-standing support for Palestine played a different but similarly instrumental role in his victory. For critics and opponents, it was the focal point of their attacks, all of which were intended to paint him as someone who was simply too radical—or, in some cases, too Muslim—to be mayor of New York City. Those attacks backfired for two reasons. The first: many establishment figures’ seeming incomprehension that, in the wake of the genocide in Gaza, Democratic voters no longer support Israel as they once did. The second: Those attacks only underlined that Mamdani was not a member of a Democratic establishment that many viewed with skepticism—or worse. Taking a stand for Palestinians, moreover, proved that Mamdani had convictions that he could be counted on to uphold in the face of blowback and criticism. “Whenever you are at peace with the making of an exception, you make it easier to make another exception—wherever, whenever,” Mamdani told theTimesmagazine.

That steadfast commitment to Palestinian rights resulted in furious criticism in the media and from his fellow Democrats, and an avalanche of attack ads funded by pro-Israel billionaires. If Mamdani qualified aspects of his support for Palestine—distancing himself from the controversial “Globalize the Intifada” chant, for instance—he didn’t really moderate his criticism of Israel’s apartheid state either. By holding firm amid that onslaught, moreover, Mamdani suggested that, if elected, he could be trusted to carry out his promises. Attacks aimed at painting him as an extremist, in other words, had the unintended effect of illustrating that he was a man of integrity. Here, too, Mamdani stands in sharp contrast to Biden and Harris, who would chastise Israel for its handling of the war in Gaza while sending it billions in arms.

The Democratic Party is addicted to messaging that is carefully—and expensively—calibrated to reach a hypothetical median voter. It has a strategist problem, in other words: Politicians won’t test messages or take positions until they’ve been extensively tested by these so-called experts. Strategists produce convoluted policies, candidates who are terrified to deviate from talking points, and campaigns that are proven failures—just look at 2016, 2024, and the current makeup of the House and Senate.