It's 1985 v. 2033 in the New York City Mayor's Race

The frontrunners in the New York Democratic primary represent a city that no longer exists and one that not yet come into existence, but there are other choices who are of the currrent moment.

During the last Democratic mayoral debate there was a heated exchange, actually several heated exchanges, between the two frontrunners Zohran Mamdani and Andrew Cuomo. This particular one occurred during a discussion, again not surprisingly, of antisemitism. Within a few minutes of each other, both men invoked the name of Ed Koch, the three-term mayor of New York who served in that job from 1978-1989.

Mandani cited Koch’s famous line, one that I have frequently used with my students, “(I)f you agree with me on nine of twelve issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on twelve of twelve issues, go see a psychiatrist.

Cuomo quoted Koch “any one who would threaten Israel, I will never support.” The former line, in various forms is one of Koch’s most famous statements. It is not clear if he ever said the latter, but Koch was a very strong supporter of Israel, so Cuomo was right regarding the sentiment, if not the words, of the former mayor.

If I were advising Andrew Cuomo, I might tell him to avoid using Koch’s name, but fortunately for the former governor, none of the other candidates responded by reminding voters of Cuomo’s role in the 1977 mayor’s race between Koch and Mario Cuomo, Andrew’s father. That was the race when a young Andrew Cuomo put up posters in some of the more conservative parts of the city, riffing on rumors that Koch was gay, that said “Vote for Cuomo, not the homo.”

Koch has been dead for over a decade and last won an election in 1985, so it was strange to hear his name in this year’s mayor’s debate, but it also elucidates how the Mamdani-Cuomo dynamic feels like a fight between New York’s past and one possible future, almost as if 1985 and 2033 were competing to win in 2025. Several other candidates, notably Brad Lander who recently won the de facto endorsement from the New York Times, and has put his body on the line to stand up to Trump’s brownshirts, are still in the thick of this race, but at least in the first round, the top two candidates will likely be Cuomo and Mamdani.

Cuomo is the kind of candidate who would have done very well in almost any mayoral election between about 1961 and 2001. During those years, there were still a lot of Italian and Irish Democrats who voted in primaries and would have responded to Cuomo’s profile as a tough-talking outer borough ethnic white man, precisely the kind of politician who dominated the city’s politics during that period. Similarly, being pro-Israel and outspoken against antisemitism was also essential for a Democratic, or any other, successful citywide candidate in those years.

Back then, the city had a larger Jewish population, a much smaller Muslim population and being anti-Israel had not become a pillar of left-wing politics. Moreover, Cuomo’s being a serial sexual harasser would not have been as damaging in that pre-#metoo era. We will soon know whether the New York of which the 67-year-old Cuomo is a product still has enough political muscle to win an election.

The 33-year-old Mamdani is not just of a different generation, but he represents a very different city, one that is developing and will only get stronger and more politically powerful in coming years.

Mamdani would be the city’s first Muslim mayor, and while currently there are more Jewish than Muslim voters in New York City, it is not difficult to see that flipping in a decade or so. Whereas, Cuomo, like many New York politicians of the last third of the twentieth century, has loudly proclaimed his opposition to antisemitism and support for Israel, Mamdani broke through as a progressive substantially on the strength of his opposition to Israel and his tiresome, and troubling, insistence that the Free Gaza movement has no antisemitic elements.

Mamdani’s success is a reminder that New York politicians can no longer look away from, or ignore altogether, Israel’s human rights abuses and atrocities in Gaza. On balance, that is a positive development, but Mamdani’s unconvincing rhetorical pyrotechnics when asked about antisemitism send a different and more troubling message to Jewish New Yorkers

Zellnor Myrie (L) Brad Lander (C) and Zorhan Mamdani (R).

Mamdani also is of the generation, just coming into political power in New York and nationally, that is considerably more progressive on economic issues that the Democratic Party was during the 1970s-1990s. That may also represent the future of New York. Mamdani’s plans for free bus fare, rent freezes and subsidized grocery stores are bold attempts to redistribute wealth and craft policy to benefit some of the poorest New Yorkers. Those ideas resonate with many voters now and may become more popular in the coming years.

Mamdani because of his identity as a socialist, and more significantly more than a whiff of antisemitism about him, and Cuomo, because of history of sexual harassment, Trump-like bluster and conservative politics are both very divisive, but due to the quirks of New York’s rank choice voting system it is likely one of them, rather than the more broadly acceptable candidates, such as Brad Lander, Scott Stringer, Zellnor Myrie or Adrienne Adams, will be the nominee.

It is unfortunate that although it is the year 2025, it feels like we are being forced to choose between a past that wasn’t great and a future that while likely to address the appalling wealth inequality that increasingly defines New York, could be difficult for Jewish New Yorkers.

Fortunately, this is not simply a two man race and there are several candidates who represent a good vision and plan for the present and near future, so the best strategy is to rank all four of the Lander, Adams, Stringer, Myrie group and then for fifth place choose between the voice of a profoundly flawed past and a future that would be very hopeful, if not for the spectre of increased antisemitism.