One of the wildest and most dramatic New York City mayoral elections in modern history finished with the flare of a presidential…and with the national attention to match.
“Hear me, President Trump, when I say this: to get to any of us, you will have to get through all of us,” said a defiant and triumphant Zohran Mamdani in a shot across the bow to his shadow opponent throughout this campaign.
Mamdani, the 34-year-old democratic socialist most people hadn’t heard of when this race began — and whose name even his fellow candidates struggled to correctly pronounce as late as last night — just became mayor of the biggest city in the country, the financial hub of the United States and the world, with a municipal employee base that’s bigger than some Fortune 500 companies.
Mamdani also becomes Gotham’s first Muslim mayor, first mayor of South Asian descent, first mayor born in Africa, and the youngest in more than a century.
He ran a marvel of a campaign. But it should also be noted that the conditions were helpful too — running against an incumbent mayor surrounded by corruption, a former governor who hardly campaigned, and a president who made him a constant target, thereby elevating him in stature.
Still, his campaign should and will be studied closely by Democrats, whose party was in desperate need of a win since 2024’s bruising defeats — and actually got three, in NYC, New Jersey and Virginia.
Here are the important takeaways:
Mamdani ran an old-school, grassroots campaign, the likes of which we’ve increasingly been abandoning for more high-tech, new media endeavors that rely less on face-to-face interactions, coalition-building and canvassing, and more on texts and social media. Mamdani did all of that, too — his social media game was unquestionably effective — but without pounding the pavement, visiting the churches and synagogues and mosques, canvassing the taxi lines at LaGuardia Airport, riding the buses, sitting with cops and developers and rabbis, and even hitting the nightclubs, the rest just look like cheap gimmicks.
It sounds counter-intuitive, but Mamdani also capitalized on his limited name ID when he began this race. He knew he’d have to introduce himself to voters in a way his most competitive opponent, former New York governor and Democratic dynasty scion Andrew Cuomo, didn’t. While Mamdani was in the streets, Cuomo was running a Rose Garden strategy that ultimately set Cuomo up to fail.
But Mamdani’s most important move was on the issues that mattered to New Yorkers. His laser-focus on affordability, housing, mass transit, child care, and quality of life met voters where they are, not where the left wants them to be — existentially worried about less tangible things like democracy, climate change, and social issues. It’s not that those things aren’t important, but they aren’t a top priority to a majority of voters when they are choosing between paying rent or paying for health insurance.
This race should also be a nail in the coffin for the left’s identity politics. While Mamdani’s win represents a number of important firsts, he didn’t run on them — he ran on solving problems, not filling quotas.
Dems should also know that Mamdani’s win doesn’t mean democratic socialism should be the national model. A candidate who’s talked about defunding the police, globalizing the intifada, and “seizing the means of production” probably isn’t going to win in Georgia, or Michigan, or other important swing states where Dems need to pick up seats.
If Mikie Sherrill and Abigail Spanberger’s wins tell us anything, it’s that Democrats still need moderates to appeal to voters in the middle of the country, in the suburbs, and even in the cities where crime and immigration are still motivating fears for plenty of people.
Mamdani’s win is also a warning to Dem leadership. He won largely without the help or backing of the national Democratic Party, and in many cases without their endorsements, and instead relied on the infrastructure of the Democratic Socialists of America. If the party isn’t necessary to get candidates elected, what is its purpose?
The biggest question now is, can Zohran govern? He may have run a nearly-flawless campaign, but that’s not the same thing as running a giant city like New York. This will test his relationship-building skills, both with the City Council and Albany but also with the NYPD and Jewish voters. It will test his organizational skills, his executive leadership, his ability to make good on promises, his commitment to transparency (even when the news is bad).
What will be tested most, however, is Mamdani’s idealism. In a city as cynical and hardened as New York, is hope enough to make meaningful change? Only time will tell.
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.





















President Donald Trump speaks with the media after signing a funding bill to end a partial government shutdown in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., Feb. 3, 2026.
Will Trump’s moves ever awaken conservatives?
Donald Trump has rewritten the rules of the presidency in ways that could change America forever, and not for the better.
His naked self-dealing, weaponizing the Justice Department against his political foes, turning on our allies, the casino-fication of the White House — none of it bodes well for the future of our democracy, setting precedents that other presidents on both sides of the aisle could very well continue.
But one of the most obvious things Trump has changed in politics is its concern with ideology and principle. The long-held philosophy that used to bind the Republican Party together is gone, because he simply didn’t have a use for it.
For conservatives, that’s been especially disorienting and troubling. It began with Trump’s disregard for the debt and deficit, and carried through to this term’s embrace of tariffs, or protectionism. His personal disinterest in what the Christian right used to call “family values” dismantled the evangelical base of the party. And his courting of white nationalists and antisemites changed the face of the party.
None of that has been enough, however, to move conservative lawmakers to significantly break with Trump or even call him out. They happily co-signed his tariffs, watched as he exploded the debt and the deficit, turned the other way at his criminality and immorality, and defended police-attacking insurrectionists at the Capitol. He even managed to tick off the Second Amendment crowd with his crackdown on guns at protests and in Washington.
None of this is conservative. But so long as they kept winning, cowardly Republicans not named Liz Cheney or Adam Kinzinger didn’t seem to care.
But now, with a new idea hatched, will Republicans finally remember their conservative roots?
On Monday, Trump called on Republicans to “nationalize the voting.” It was a startling suggestion for a party that’s always concerned itself with state’s rights and federalism.
“The Republicans should say, we want to take over, we should take over the voting, the voting in at least many, 15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting,” he said.
The call is in service of his election lie, of course, an answer to the non-existent scourge of voter fraud that rigged just the 2020 election and somehow not the 2016 or 2024 elections.
Except Trump is the one attempting the rigging. He’s tried to end mail ballots and voting machines, sued two dozen blue states for their voter rolls, embarked on a rare mid-decade redistricting campaign, dismantled the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force, and pardoned dozens of people who signed false election certifications for him in 2020.
It’s tempting to dismiss the idea as merely a self-soothing ramble, the nonsensical blurting of an old man still fixated on an imaginary injustice. But it should offend and worry everyone, not least of all Republicans.
Elections are held locally for good reason — it’s harder to rig them that way. The Constitution says states shall determine the times, places and manner of elections, for the explicit purpose of decentralizing and protecting their integrity. It’s the backbone of federalism.
But for House Speaker Mike Johnson it’s nothing to get worked up about. “What you’re hearing from the president is his frustration about the lack of some blue states, frankly, of enforcing these things and making sure that they are free and fair elections.”
But Democrats are rightly concerned, and preparing for potential “federal government intrusion” in the midterms. “This is now a legitimate planning category,” said Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon. “It’s extraordinarily sad, but it would be irresponsible for us to disregard the possibility.”
Extraordinarily sad, indeed. But will it revive the dormant conservatism in the Republican Party? Will lawmakers remember their principles and patriotism? Or will they continue to sleep through Trump’s total remaking of America’s political system?
Maybe this will be the thing that finally wakes them up.
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.