SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
democratic primary
A Day Before the Election, Poll Shows Mamdani Besting Cuomo in NYC Democratic Mayoral Primary
"On the day before the election, we stand on the verge of toppling a political dynasty and winning a city we can afford," wrote Mamdani.
Jun 23, 2025
New poll results released Monday show State Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani narrowly ahead of former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the city's Democratic mayoral primary, which takes place on Tuesday and will be conducted via ranked-choice voting.
Early voting in the race began on June 14 and has far exceeded early voting turnout from the previous Democratic mayoral primary in 2021, though that contest was impacted by Covid-19.
The final Emerson College Polling/PIX11/The Hill survey of the primary race shows that Cuomo leads Mamdani 35% to 32% (within the plus or minus 3.4% margin of error) when voters are asked about their top pick overall. However, when the two face off in a ranked-choice voting simulation, Mamdani—a democratic socialist—wins with an outright majority in the eighth round with 52% to Cuomo's 48%, according to the poll. The margin of error for the final round is plus or minus 3.6%.
"On the day before the election, we stand on the verge of toppling a political dynasty and winning a city we can afford. But we can only do it with you," Mamdani wrote on Monday, referencing the poll.
The only other candidate who notched above 10% is New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, who secured 12.8% when voters were asked to name their top pick in the race. Lander was recently arrested by federal agents at an immigration court in lower Manhattan while escorting an individual out of immigration court.
In New York City's ranked-choice voting system, which is used for certain elections including primary and special elections for mayor, voters rank multiple candidates on their ballots. If no candidate receives more than 50% of first choice votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and the votes that went to that candidate are reallocated to the voters' second choice. That distribution of votes repeats in subsequent rounds until one candidate wins an outright majority or there are only two candidates remaining.
"Over five months, Mamdani's support has surged from 1% to 32%, while Cuomo finishes near where he began," said Spencer Kimball, executive director of Emerson College Polling, in a statement published Monday. "In the ranked-choice simulation, Mamdani gains 18 points compared to Cuomo's 12, putting him ahead in the final round for the first time in an Emerson poll."
Cuomo has been the consistent frontrunner in the contest, though some recent polling shows Mamdani eating into his lead or pulling ahead.
"This is an outlier: Every other credible poll in this election—including two released last week—has shown Governor Cuomo with a double digit lead, which is exactly where this election will end tomorrow. Between now and then we will continue to fight for every vote like he will fight for every New Yorker as mayor," a Cuomo spokesperson in a statement sent to multiple outlets.
In a Marist poll published last week, Cuomo broke above the 50% threshold in the seventh round of ranked-choice voting.
Mamdani has become a viable contender in the race in part because of an impressive ground game and his high number of individual small dollar donations.
"The campaign has tapped into people’s belief that things could genuinely be better. The context of [President Donald] Trump is a part of that, where people are feeling in a very dark place politically and feeling the necessity of getting involved," said one Mamdani canvasser who spoke to The American Prospect. Mamdani is “running on hope, possibility, and joy. We really could have a better society and a better city, and I think that has spoken deeply to people.”
Volunteers with his campaign have knocked on over a million doors around the city, according to his campaign website, and nearly 16,000 individual donors have contributed a donation of less than $100, according to The Financial Times. Cuomo has amassed a little over 1,000 donations from individual donors who gave less than $100, per the outlet.
Cuomo has benefited from backers supporting him through super political action committees, which are not limited in how much they raise though they are barred from donating directly to a political candidate. According to the FT, pro-Cuomo super PACS have poured an unprecedented $27 million into the race.
When it comes to high profile political endorsements, Cuomo has the backing of several establishment Democratic figures, including former President Bill Clinton and U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.). Meanwhile, Mamdani has earned the endorsement of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Wow. Just Wow': New Poll Has Mamdani Ahead of Cuomo in NYC Mayoral Primary
"Everyone who is serious about defeating Andrew Cuomo needs to endorse Zohran Mamdani immediately," wrote one Democratic state senator.
Jun 12, 2025
A June survey from Public Policy Polling shows New York City mayoral candidate and democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani ahead of opponent and former Democratic New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo as the city's Democratic primary draws near. Primary day is June 24 and early voting begins June 14.
Cuomo has been the consistent front-runner in the race, though Mamdani, a state assemblymember who is running on an affordability platform, has risen from long-shot candidate to serious contender.
"All gas, no breaks," wrote Mamdani on X on Wednesday of the poll results.
"When you run a disciplined, grassroots campaign relentlessly focused on an agenda to address the crises in working people's lives, these are the results," Andrew Epstein, spokesperson for Mamdani, told Politico, which was first to report on the results of the poll on Wednesday.
Mehdi Hasan, editor-in-chief and CEO of the outlet Zeteo, wrote on X: "Wow. Just wow."
New York Democratic state Sen. Jabari Brisport reacted to reporting on the poll by writing that "everyone who is serious about defeating Andrew Cuomo needs to endorse Zohran Mamdani immediately."
The poll was conducted for the campaign of candidate for city comptroller Justin Brannan, a Democrat, and surveyed 573 likely Democratic primary voters between June 6-7. On June 9, Mamdani posted a video asking New Yorkers to donate to Brannan's campaign.
The relevant question in the poll lists eight Democratic candidates running in the race and asks respondents who they would vote for among them.
Thirty-five percent of respondents said Mamdani, while 31% said they would support Cuomo. The other candidate options listed did not break above 10%, and 11% of respondents said they were not sure.
The poll, however, does not include how the candidates would fare in a ranked-choice voting simulation. New York City uses ranked-choice voting for certain elections, including primary and special elections for mayor. The system allows voters to rank multiple candidates on their ballots.
"As you know, we have had a poll in the field at the same time and our poll showed a race with us maintaining what has now been a consistent double digit lead for more than three months—which is rare for any NYC mayoral race in recent memory," Cuomo spokesperson Rich Azzopardi told Politico. The poll Azzopardi was speaking of is from Expedition Strategies and showed Cuomo leading Mamdani by 12 points after eight rounds of voting.
In response to reporting on the latest survey that shows Mamdani ahead, some observers cast doubt on the quality of Public Policy Polling's polls.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Bowman’s Loss Reveals the Dangers of Unregulated ‘Dark Money’ Funds in Primaries
If left unchecked, America’s democracy, already distorted by big money, will be swamped and destroyed by billionaires who will make elections their game in which to manipulate voters at will.
Jul 02, 2024
Last week, New York Democratic Representative Jamaal Bowman was defeated in his bid for a third term in Congress. In describing the outcome, newspaper headlines and media analysts only scratched the surface of why and how this happened and the consequences this contest would have on future elections.
For their part, pro-Israel groups, while acknowledging that they spent a combined $25 million dollars to defeat Bowman, tried to play it two ways. On the one hand, they gloated that their involvement was decisive proof that “being pro-Israel was good policy and good politics.” Like gangsters of old they wanted to send a message of fear to other candidates that “if you cross us, we’ll get you too.” On the other hand, they attempted to downplay their role suggesting that Bowman’s loss was due to his “radicalism,” with voters demonstrating their preference for the more “centrist” candidate, negatively comparing Bowman’s passion with the staider demeanor of his opponent, County Executive George Latimer.
The lessons the media deduced from all of this were that pro-Israel groups indeed won, progressives lost, and that supporting Palestinian rights was an electorally dangerous proposition. This, however, ignored the deeper story that played out in this election.
If the party doesn’t address this issue, they may lose a sufficient number of their base who are resentful of the party establishment’s failure to both stop the genocide in Gaza and to defend progressive champions like Jamaal Bowman.
First and foremost, it was about the huge amounts of money spent, why and how it was used, and the impact it had on the contest. The $25 million pro-Israel groups spent to defeat Bowman was by far the most ever expended in a congressional primary, used mainly for negative advertising and direct mail attacks smearing Bowman’s character and criticizing his style. Virtually no mention of Israel was made in these ads.
During some points in the campaign, voters were nightly subjected to more than a half-dozen of these attack ads. The impression created was that Bowman was a flawed individual and an unworthy candidate. One observer told me that “if Jamaal’s mother had stayed at home watching this negative onslaught, she wouldn’t have voted for her son either.” That’s the role of negative ads: to damage the candidates being attacked so that they are defined as so flawed that their supporters are discouraged from voting on Election Day. This tactic is simply an expensive form of voter suppression.
In reality, Latimer outpaced Bowman in “radicalism” by making outrageous, racially tinged comments that could have been used against him. But Bowman didn’t have $25 million to define and destroy Latimer’s character. And so, the impression was created that Bowman was a loose cannon and Latimer was the responsible candidate. To be sure, racism played a role in all of this as the contest became “the angry, frightening young black man versus the calm, thoughtful older white guy.”
How the money was used is one thing, but why it was raised is something else to consider. Pro-Israel groups are running scared. They are losing the public debate over policy—especially among Democrats. Most Democrats are deeply opposed to Israeli policies in Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian lands. Majorities want a cease-fire and an end to settlements. And they want to stop further arms shipments to Israel.
Knowing this, pro-Israel groups never make their campaigns a referendum on Israel. Instead, they focus their attention on the character of their opponents. When they win, they claim that it was a victory for Israel and support for its policies, when it most decidedly isn’t and never was.
There was another factor in this contest that was largely ignored by commentators. Bowman’s congressional district had been redistricted last year (by a statewide committee that included Latimer). The new district removed many of the areas that had been more favorable to Bowman and included new areas that were more favorable to Latimer. This made Bowman vulnerable, providing pro-Israel groups with the opportunity to play in this race and make it look like they won on the merits.
Historically this is how they’ve done their work—only going after vulnerable candidates. It’s why they left alone other equally strong pro-Palestinian, but less vulnerable, members of Congress. It’s a cowardly approach, to be sure, but it gives them bragging rights they can use to cower others into thinking they are invincible.
Examining who the donors to these pro-Israel campaigns were, we find that while they are largely supporters of Israel, many of the very large contributors are billionaire Republicans who take great pleasure in meddling in a Democratic primary helping to defeat progressive candidates. The use of unregulated “dark money” that is increasingly playing a role in primaries ought to set off alarms. Twice I tried and failed to get the Democratic Party to ban such “dark money” funds. My warning then was that if this tactic can be used by pro-Israel groups now, why won’t other powerful lobbies make use of this approach in the future. If left unchecked, America’s democracy, already distorted by big money, will be swamped and destroyed by billionaires who will make elections their game in which to manipulate voters at will.
One final observation for Democrats: While Bowman was defeated, support for Palestinian rights continues to grow. And the resentment of voters who favored Bowman and other targeted members of Congress will also continue to grow. These are Democratic voters that U.S. President Joseph Biden will need to win in November. If the party doesn’t address this issue, they may lose a sufficient number of their base who are resentful of the party establishment’s failure to both stop the genocide in Gaza and to defend progressive champions like Jamaal Bowman. Seen in this light, “Israel’s win” in the Bowman contest may negatively impact Democrats’ chances for victory in November.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular