The test of an explanation is whether it explains the failure of the alternatives. These explanations don't. Cuomo was also not based on identity politics and came across as fairly calm.
For that matter, so was Kamala.
Zohran won because:
1. He was young, fresh, charismatic, good-looking
2. He was anti-establishment (this matter more than left or right)
3. He advocated serious left-wing policies that appealed to the people in NY and of the kind that old-school Democrats are too bought-out and mealy-mouthed to ever advocate
4. He had unabashed moral stances, as, most prominently, on Israel & Gaza, and again on the aforementioned economic issues (tax the billionaires).
5. He had an excellent sense of how to use social media and advertising -- fresh, funny, and relatably.
In fact, in pretty much every one of these 5 he was like AOC, who was the last person to upset the apple cart in NY in this way.
about "stopped antagonising entire demographies" - Zohran certainly has anatogonised the Jews, by his reaction to Oct 7 Hamas attack back in 2023. Perhaps it got him votes with some Dems, but it certainly is a huge liability, seen more broadly.
As well, he's quoted as proposing to tax "richer and whiter neighborhoods" - how is "whiter" not an identity politics? Of course it is...
Zohran is very popular among Jews, such as Brad Lander.
He's antagonized *Zionists*. It's not at all clear whether Zionists should even be considered Jewish at this point, since they seem to ignore all the Jewish laws.
Do you even know who Zionists were and are? Not all Jews were lucky enough, or scared enough, to get the hell out of the Continental Europe by 1917 or so.
Let me share here a cover of an old, about 1900, (Jewish) Bund (an East European party of these Jews who opposed Zionist idea of getting back to the ancestors' land) song. Some modern US Jews seem to be as detached from reality and history just as the text of this song is.
While I think these are general trends, there is something else going on, which is related but subtly different.
The "establishment" was running a sexual harrasser (Cuomo) and a self-dealer (Eric Adams), both of whom also simply failed to do basic function of government stuff (like getting NYPD to stop parking on the sidewalk), declaring it "impossible". They were also both obsessed with cars.
Sexual harassment is not acceptable to the younger generations, for the most part.
Self-dealing is not acceptable to the younger generations, for the most part.
Most of NYC does not drive cars, but takes buses & subways instead.
Everyone wants the government to do the basics.
If I were to describe a common theme of the "establishment" candidates, it would be: they feel that they have the right to do criminal and corrupt things, that their buddies do too, and the people shouldn't complain if nothing works.
Now, it's surprising to me that this has *ever* been a successful political platform, but I've also watched _Servant of the People_, which satirizes the attitude: even Goloborodko's own family reacts to his election with "Hooray, we get our cut of the corruption now!"
Anyway, this "corruption for everyone, but I want my gang on top" politics is clearly very old, but it is extremely unpopular among younger people in the US. (And for that matter in Ukraine.) You can see that type of "everyone's corrupt but I want my gang to be on top" attitiude back again with Donald Trump voters.
But Zohran Mamdani campaigned on an actual good government platform, where government does things for everyone and the people in power only benefit to the extent that everyone benefits. And vast majorities wanted that.
Cuomo and Eric Adams just represented another brand of "everyone's corrupt but I want my gang on top". People are hungering for someone who is actually not corrupt.
S1E18 of Servant of the People (the Katya episode, where Goloborodko tries to find someone non-corrupt to run the roads department) has really stuck with me.
I don't know how much you know about NYC, but the exact same plot would be completely convincing if set in NYC
Zohran looks good too because the democrats have no one to present. They all are clueless and just push race, identity politics, and "I'm a victim" talk (the social causes party). This is what people are tired of. Everyone wants to be a victim and/or martyr now. This is what is taught in the university's now. All the victims, who wants to be a victim? (lol isn't everyone kinda of a victim? Is or was at one time, or can be very easy made into one!)
The University = The "New Religion" (Religion of nihilism)
The test of an explanation is whether it explains the failure of the alternatives. These explanations don't. Cuomo was also not based on identity politics and came across as fairly calm.
For that matter, so was Kamala.
Zohran won because:
1. He was young, fresh, charismatic, good-looking
2. He was anti-establishment (this matter more than left or right)
3. He advocated serious left-wing policies that appealed to the people in NY and of the kind that old-school Democrats are too bought-out and mealy-mouthed to ever advocate
4. He had unabashed moral stances, as, most prominently, on Israel & Gaza, and again on the aforementioned economic issues (tax the billionaires).
5. He had an excellent sense of how to use social media and advertising -- fresh, funny, and relatably.
In fact, in pretty much every one of these 5 he was like AOC, who was the last person to upset the apple cart in NY in this way.
about "stopped antagonising entire demographies" - Zohran certainly has anatogonised the Jews, by his reaction to Oct 7 Hamas attack back in 2023. Perhaps it got him votes with some Dems, but it certainly is a huge liability, seen more broadly.
As well, he's quoted as proposing to tax "richer and whiter neighborhoods" - how is "whiter" not an identity politics? Of course it is...
Zohran is very popular among Jews, such as Brad Lander.
He's antagonized *Zionists*. It's not at all clear whether Zionists should even be considered Jewish at this point, since they seem to ignore all the Jewish laws.
Do you even know who Zionists were and are? Not all Jews were lucky enough, or scared enough, to get the hell out of the Continental Europe by 1917 or so.
Let me share here a cover of an old, about 1900, (Jewish) Bund (an East European party of these Jews who opposed Zionist idea of getting back to the ancestors' land) song. Some modern US Jews seem to be as detached from reality and history just as the text of this song is.
English text comes at 0:50.
https://youtu.be/tQMRwk8WDd4?si=ty8uUgWDkoisAL3O
While I think these are general trends, there is something else going on, which is related but subtly different.
The "establishment" was running a sexual harrasser (Cuomo) and a self-dealer (Eric Adams), both of whom also simply failed to do basic function of government stuff (like getting NYPD to stop parking on the sidewalk), declaring it "impossible". They were also both obsessed with cars.
Sexual harassment is not acceptable to the younger generations, for the most part.
Self-dealing is not acceptable to the younger generations, for the most part.
Most of NYC does not drive cars, but takes buses & subways instead.
Everyone wants the government to do the basics.
If I were to describe a common theme of the "establishment" candidates, it would be: they feel that they have the right to do criminal and corrupt things, that their buddies do too, and the people shouldn't complain if nothing works.
Now, it's surprising to me that this has *ever* been a successful political platform, but I've also watched _Servant of the People_, which satirizes the attitude: even Goloborodko's own family reacts to his election with "Hooray, we get our cut of the corruption now!"
Anyway, this "corruption for everyone, but I want my gang on top" politics is clearly very old, but it is extremely unpopular among younger people in the US. (And for that matter in Ukraine.) You can see that type of "everyone's corrupt but I want my gang to be on top" attitiude back again with Donald Trump voters.
But Zohran Mamdani campaigned on an actual good government platform, where government does things for everyone and the people in power only benefit to the extent that everyone benefits. And vast majorities wanted that.
Cuomo and Eric Adams just represented another brand of "everyone's corrupt but I want my gang on top". People are hungering for someone who is actually not corrupt.
S1E18 of Servant of the People (the Katya episode, where Goloborodko tries to find someone non-corrupt to run the roads department) has really stuck with me.
I don't know how much you know about NYC, but the exact same plot would be completely convincing if set in NYC
Zohran looks good too because the democrats have no one to present. They all are clueless and just push race, identity politics, and "I'm a victim" talk (the social causes party). This is what people are tired of. Everyone wants to be a victim and/or martyr now. This is what is taught in the university's now. All the victims, who wants to be a victim? (lol isn't everyone kinda of a victim? Is or was at one time, or can be very easy made into one!)
The University = The "New Religion" (Religion of nihilism)