I decided after Zohran Mamdani won the Democratic primary that I would vote for him. I was concerned about his lack of managerial experience, but impressed by his energy, his enthusiasm, his ever-present smile, and his willingness to try bold policies on behalf of working-class and low-income New Yorkers. I was repulsed by the billionaire-funded hate campaign against him as a Muslim.
But at some point before the general election, I wavered. I read article after article about his hard-and-fast views on Israel, the BDS movement, and other third-rail topics. I am not a Zionist but I believe that Israel should not have to justify its right to exist. And I condemn the rightwing cabal in Israel that has supported the genocidal war in Gaza, as well as settler terrorism against Palestinians who live on the West Bank.
I decided not to vote, which I have never done. Voting is a precious right, which I have always exercised.
Then I read this article in the New York Times, in which David Leonhardt interviewed Senator Bernie Sanders, and it resolved all my doubt and hesitation. After reading this, I went to my polling place and very happily voted for Zohran Mamdani.
Of course, I was thrilled to see a Democratic sweep in Virginia, New Jersey, Pennsylvania (where the state GOP proposed to remove three Democratic judges from the state’s Supreme Court), and California, where Prop. 50 passed easily, allowing a redistricting intended to produce an additional 5 Democratic seats in Congress. Prop 50 was a response to the Texas GOP’s redistricting that will eliminate 5 Democratic seats. Joke of the day: California Republicans are suing to block the Prop 50 gerrymandering because it favors one race over another. I didn’t hear similar concerns about gerrymanders by Republicans in Texas, Missouri, and other states that are creating new Republican seats, eliminating Black representation.
The article linked above is a gift article, so you can read it in full without a subscription.
Here is a sample:
David Leonhardt: Senator Bernie Sanders started talking about income inequality nearly 40 years ago.
Archived clip of Bernie Sanders in 1988:In our nation today, we have extreme disparity between the rich and the poor, that elections are bought and sold by people who have huge sums of money.
He railed against oligarchs before Elon Musk made his first million.
Archived clip of Sanders in 1991: To a very great extent, the United States of America today is increasingly becoming an oligarchy.
Sanders started out as a political oddity. But his focus on inequality has made him one of the most influential politicians in America. I wanted to know where he thinks we’re headed next. So I asked him to join me for “America’s Next Story,” a Times Opinion series about the ideas that once held our country together, and those that might do so again.
Senator Bernie Sanders, thank you for being here.
Bernie Sanders: My pleasure….
Leonhardt: OK, let’s get into it. I want to go back to the pre-Trump era and think about the fact that a lot of Democrats during that time — I’m thinking about the Clintons and Obama — felt more positively toward the market economy than you did.
They were positive toward trade. They didn’t worry that much about corporate power. They didn’t pay that much attention to labor unions. And if I’m being totally honest, a lot of people outside of the Democratic Party, like New York Times columnists, had many of those same attitudes.
Sanders: Yes, I recall that. Vaguely, yes. Some of them actually weren’t supportive of my candidacy for president.
Leonhardt: That is fair. I assume you would agree that the consensus has shifted in your direction over the last decade or so?
Sanders: I think that’s fair to say.
Leonhardt: And I’m curious: Why do you think those other Democrats and progressives missed what you saw?
Sanders: In the 1970s — the early ’70s — some of the leaders in the Democratic Party had this brilliant idea. They said: Hey, Republicans are getting all of this money from the wealthy and the corporations. Why don’t we hitch a ride, as well? And they started doing that. Throughout the history of this country — certainly the modern history of this country, from F.D.R. to Truman to Kennedy, even — the Democratic Party was the party of the working class. Period. That’s all your working class. Most people were Democrats.
But from the ’70s on, for a variety of reasons — like the attraction of big money — the party began to pay more attention to the needs of the corporate world and the wealthy rather than working-class people. And I think, in my view, that has been a total disaster, not only politically, but for our country as a whole.
Leonhardt: I agree, certainly, that corporate money played a role within the party. But I also think a lot of people genuinely believed things like trade would help workers. When I think about —
Sanders: Hmm, no.
Leonhardt: You think it’s all about money?
Sanders: No. What I think is, if you talked to working-class people during that period, as I did, if you talked to the union movement during that period, as I did, you said: Guys, do you think it’s a great idea that we have a free-trade agreement with China? No worker in America thought that was a good idea. The corporate world thought it was a good idea. The Washington Post thought it was a great idea. I don’t know what The New York Times thought.
But every one of us who talked to unions, who talked to workers, understood that the result of that would be the collapse of manufacturing in America and the loss of millions of good-paying jobs. Because corporations understood: If I could pay people 30 cents an hour in China, why the hell am I going to pay a worker in America a living wage? We understood that.
Leonhardt: I think that’s fair. I guess I’m interested in why you think that members of the Democratic Party — not workers, but members — and other progressives ignored workers back then but have come more closely to listen to workers. I mean, if you look at the Biden administration’s policy, if you look at the way Senator Schumer talks about his own views shifting, I do think there’s been this meaningful shift in the Democratic Party toward your views. Not all the way.
Sanders: Well, what we will have to see is to what degree people are just seeing where the wind is blowing as to whether or not they mean it.
In my view, working-class Americans did not vote for Donald Trump because they wanted to see the top 1 percent get a trillion dollars in tax breaks. They did not want to see 15 million people, including many of them, being thrown off the health care they had or their health care premiums double, etc. They voted for Trump because he said: I am going to do something. The system is broken. I’m going to do something.
What did the Democrats say? Well, in 13 years, if you’re making $40,000, $48,000, we may be able to help your kid get to college. But if you’re making a penny more, we can’t quite do that. The system is OK — we’re going to nibble around the edges. Trump smashed the system. Of course, everything he’s doing is disastrous. Democrats? Eh, system is OK — let’s nibble around the edges.
Democrats lost the election. All right? They abdicated. They came up with no alternative. Because you know what? They, even today, don’t acknowledge the economic crises facing the working class of this country. Now you tell me, how many Democrats are going around saying: You know what? We have a health care system that is broken, completely. We are the only major country on Earth not to guarantee health care to all people I’ve introduced Medicare for All. You know how many Democrats in the Senate I have on board?
Leonhardt: How many?
Sanders: Fifteen — out of a caucus of 47.
Leonhardt: And you think Medicare for All is both good policy and good politics?
Sanders: Of course, it’s good policy! Health care is a human right! I feel very strongly about that. And I think the function of our health care system should not make the drug companies and the insurance companies phenomenally rich. We guarantee health care to all people — that’s what most Americans think. Where’s the leader?
I think that at a time when we have more income and wealth inequality, you know what the American people think? Maybe we really levy some heavy duty taxes on the billionaire class. I believe that. I think most Americans, including a number of Republicans, believe that. Hmm, not quite so sure where the Democrats are. I believe that you don’t keep funding a war criminal like Netanyahu to starve the children of Gaza. That’s what I believe. It’s what most Americans believe. An overwhelming majority in the Democratic world believes it. Hmm, Democratic leadership, maybe not quite so much.
The point is that, right now, 60 percent of our people have been paycheck to paycheck. I don’t know that the Democratic leadership understands that there are good, decent people out there working as hard as they can, having a hard time paying their rent. Because the cost of housing is off the charts, health care is off the charts, child care is off the charts. The campaign finance system is completely broken. When Musk can spend $270 million to elect Trump, you’ve got a broken system. Our job is to create an economy and a political system that works for working people, not just billionaires.
PLEASE OPEN THE LINK AND READ THE REST OF THIS AMAZING INTERVIEW.

Hello Ms. Ravitch,
I read your blog and celebrate your support for public education, student-centered pedagogy, and fact-based analysis of Republican damage to our future. I must comment on your support for Mamdani. Your wavering was based on good instincts. Your gut was more correct than Bernie Sanders. It’s now our responsibility to watch Mr. Mamdani’s leadership to protect Jewish interests in New York and assure that his calls for BDS, cancelation of investment in Israel, & shutting down the Cornell/Technion partnership don’t damage Israel or hurt New York’s economic stability. None of this brings peace or justice to Palestinians. It hurts the Arab Israelis who work in those areas. I respectfully clarify one of your statements: ” I am not a Zionist but I believe that Israel should not have to justify its right to exist”. Believing in Israel’s right to exist is the definition of a Zionist. Zionists should be as critical of the Israeli government as Americans are of our own. If you don’t agree with terrorists who call for a global intifada from the river to the sea, you are a Zionist. If you think that the Jewish state deserves democracy with the same fervor as Americans deserve it, you’re a Zionist. Both our nations need better leadership.
With great admiration, Shelley Rivlin Co-Chair LAUSD Commission on Human Relations and Equity
>
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will watch Mayor-elect Mamdani as his mayoralty evolves. I love Israel, but I don’t love its current government.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mamdani’s position on Israel is the same as many liberal progressives, including Jewish scholars and activists: Israel has the right to exist, Palestinians have the right to freedom and safety, and the occupation must end. He supports targeted divestment from companies involved in the occupation—not blanket boycotts—as a nonviolent way to push for a two-state solution rooted in equality and dignity for both peoples.
This seems like a reasonable approach to me. What do you think?
LikeLiked by 1 person
David, that’s reasonable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Does Palestine have a right to exist? They were there first. (Please don’t tell me about some mythical book written 3,000 years ago when the current occupants of Israel bear no resemblance to the people who occupied that region 3,000 years ago (but the Palestinians do))
LikeLike
It’s not clear who was there “first.” If that’s the definition of statehood, then the U.S. has no right to exist.
LikeLike
“If that’s the definition of statehood, then the U.S. has no right to exist.”
Correct!
And, yes, it’s abundantly clear who was there first. Read the Zionists themselves -their whole history is a call to emigrate to Palestine, where they were surprised to find people already living and cultivating the land. Those people being the Palestinians.
LikeLike
Read the Bible. The Israelites were there first.
LikeLike
LOL, the Bible is not a history book – it’s a collection of historical works of fiction like the Homeric tales or Gilgamesh. I’d think an historian would know that. And again, the blond-haired, blue-eyed people currently in Israel are clearly not the descendants of the people who lived in that region 3,000 years ago. If they were already there, they wouldn’t have had to emigrate.
LikeLike
Dienne, you just don’t like the idea of a Jewish state. Do you have the same objections to Muslim states? Or is it only the Jewish state that you detest?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Incidentally, even if you think the Bible is historically true, it was God who cast out the Israelites from the Promised Land and destroyed the Temple because of their disobedience. It is God alone who will restore the Jews to the Promised Land and rebuild the Temple. Any attempt by humans to force God’s hand is against God’s word.
LikeLike
No one–not even you–knows who was there 3,000 years ago. In the 1940s, Jews in the Holy Land were called Palestinians. I contributed nickels and dimes every Sunday at Sunday School for Palestine.
And it doesn’t matter who was there 3,000 years ago. Only an idiot would believe that.
If it were true, and it’s not, every American would go back to wherever their grandfather or great-great grandfathers came from. All of the U.S. would revert to Native American tribes.
LikeLike
You’re the one who told me to read the Bible.
LikeLike
Dienne, don’t read the Bible. Try common sense.
LikeLike
Maybe Israel can solve this problem by just doing land acknowledgments, like we do here in the U.S.
LikeLiked by 1 person
lol
LikeLike
Dienne,
I’m an atheist Jew so I don’t believe in the Bible as fact however there’s historic evidence – geological artifacts with Hebrew found in Israel, The Western Wall of Solomon’s temple, the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls is noted as evidence of Jews in the region or at least passing through the region.
There’s plenty more than just accepting the Bible as fact that the Jews were there first.
LikeLike
My wife and I loved seeing two very empathetic, intelligent women WIN! Fresh voices and did I say INTELLIGENT? Yes, out here in CA, I kept telling people, “You have to fight fire with fire and this is to offset what Texas did.” They blasted us with Schwarzenegger ads telling us to VOTE NO as it was a “political grab.” Cut the crap. Also I am so happy Alex Padilla and AOC ran ads in Spanish to educate voters as well. We also got some help by measure that will fund our hospitals in Santa Clara County. For one, when my younger son had a heart attack and stroke (27) while at the gym (no one figured out why but we think it has something to do with Covid) the closest hospital was 45 minutes away that specialized in cardiac arrest. That hospital was slated to close, but due to public uproar it remains open. That was a horrifying experience. But, people are sounding off and glad that we have a chance of getting back to the way Congress used to do things. I can hope. And, Zohran is just a few years older than my younger son! I concur: he is filled with energy, has good ideas, and we need that to push against status quo. Great interview with him and John Stewart on The Daily Show. On another note, I know you like Abbott Elementary, but there is another show I watch on Hulu called, “The English Teacher” a comedy as well. And, based in Austin, Texas. I think you might have some fun watching it. Blessings!
LikeLike
And here it goes. Felon47 wants more seats in Texas and that’s okay. CA fights fire with fire and now…
https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/11/05/prop-50-trump-threatens-legal-action-saying-ballot-measure-is-unconstitutional-and-a-giant-scam/?utm_email+=8592245344B8D4818542E5264E&lctg+=8592245344B8D4818542E5264E&active=no&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=https%3a%2f%2fwww.mercurynews.com%2f2025%2f11%2f05%2fprop-50-trump-threatens-legal-action-saying-ballot-measure-is-unconstitutional-and-a-giant-scam%2f&utm_campaign=bang-multi_pubs-afternoon_briefing-nl&utm_content=hybrid
LikeLike
Thanks for the good recommendation!
LikeLike
you will get what you deserve
the nazis never asked who you supported when they came for the Jews. They just wanted to annihilate all Jews. Same as the Palestinians on 10/7. It wasn’t just Hamas that attacked festival goers, mixed in were Palestinian civilians many who worked on the peace activists’ kibbutzim betraying the very Jews that helped them with rides to hospitals and pro peace activism for their human rights. Those peace folks…. They were targeted and brutally slaughtered. Their Arab friends didn’t ask what kind of Jew they were. They just burned their families alive or shot them, or tried to behead them with a garden hoe. Not one Palestinian asked who they supported when they threw grenades into bomb shelters or killed children in front of their parents. And when they silently become the majority in our country, they still won’t ask what kind of Jew you are when it comes time for the slaughter. And I repeat, you get what you voted for.
from a non Jew
LikeLike
Love his education platform!
Mamdani’s education platform is centered on strengthening public schools and opposing the privatization of education. He supports fully funding public schools, especially in historically underserved communities, and enforcing New York’s constitutional requirement for equitable school funding. He opposes the expansion of charter schools and co-location because they divert resources and space from public schools. Mamdani also rejects high-stakes testing as the primary measure of learning and supports more holistic, student-centered approaches. In higher education, he advocates for restoring tuition-free CUNY and raising salaries and support for teachers and paraprofessionals. Overall, his focus is on investment in public education, equity, and democratic control of schools.
LikeLiked by 1 person
David, by contrast, Andrew Cuomo pledged to restore the test-and-punish policies of NCLB. More school closings, more charter schools, more testing.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Re “I am not a Zionist but I believe that Israel should not have to justify its right to exist.”
No country has a “right to exist.” All countries have a claim on the land they occupy via the “right of conquest,” namely that possession in nine-tenths of the law. Israel has no greater “right to exist” than any other country and if conquered would no longer exist, which has happened several times in its history already.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Steve, that’s true. When a country is conquered, it may cease to exist. Since 1948, Israel has fought and repelled numerous invasions, intended to obliterate. Israel is heavily armed to defend its right to exist. Peace in the Middle East won’t happen until all sides can lay down their arms and focus on building a better life for its citizens.
LikeLike
As usual we are in agreement. I just didn’t want there to be a misunderstanding regarding a “right to exist” which doesn’t exist. (Ask Jack Kennedy.)
LikeLike
By “right,” do you mean “under international law”? Because under international law, all nations that are member states of the United Nations have unique territorial sovereignty and so a “right to exist.”
LikeLike
Mamdani is portrayed as a “Communist!”. Similar to what Bloomberg said about Bernie’s “Commie!” (a comment worthy of a third grader) health care plan.
So Mamdani and Bernie are communists! The difference is that Bernie is safely tucked away in scenic, little old Vermont. While Zohran is smack dab in the middle of the financial capital of the USA. In a city that Mike Bloomberg made into a haven for billionaires.
Bernie is as sincere and unapologetic as they come. I met him as a young Senator at a picnic lawn party for Vermont farmers who were worried about the onslaught of agribusiness.
Cuomo, like Trump, used “public safety” as his primary platform. Mamdani represents hope and much needed change for many of us. I’m glad he won. He won’t be able to achieve all of his goals…nor should he. It’s a big city, which means that compromises are a necessity. But he’s aware of his areas of inexperience and, from what I’ve read, is good at delegating authority and listening to people who can fill those holes. He’s not a narcissist or egomaniac.
I’m glad he won. So are many people throughout the USA. There’s finally a crack in the glass ceiling and we need to take advantage of it.
LikeLike
This sums it up brilliantly, imo:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/10/27
LikeLike
Diane,
Just wanted to point out that the term Zionist has in recent days been co-opted by antisemites as a code word for Jew and in my experience most antizionists are indeed antisemites.
The truth is, zionism is just the belief that Israel has a right to exist and that Jews have a right to self determination in their ancestraln homeland – that is, Israel.
It does not exclude Arab Muslims right to self determination.
So, I am an staunch zionist while abhorring the current Israeli government and it sounds like you have similar views.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I see this on Reddit a lot. The discourse is so nasty.
LikeLike
Mike, yes!
LikeLike
A legal right that cannot be enforced is not a legal right, it is just words on paper. I would hate to be in a place in which I needed to appeal to international law to keep my country from being conquered. (Is there an example of this working?)
LikeLike
I am not a fan of Mamdani, not because of Israel, but because of his policies.
That said, I have to acknowledge that Mamdani has rare political talent. And unlike Cuomo, he seems like he is likely not a terrible person. I am hopeful that he will exhibit the pragmatism in office that he signaled during the campaign.
LikeLike
”I am hopeful that he will exhibit the pragmatism in office that he signaled during the campaign”
Yes. As am I. I think that’s crucial to his success, here.
He’s zeroing in on raising taxes on the wealthy. Should be interesting to see (should he be successful) if they “just leave”, as Bloomberg predicted when he was asked about doing the same.
LikeLike