Mamdani Is Not (All) the Story

Prof. Amnon Cavari, Head of the Institute for Liberty and Responsibility, Reichman University
November 5, 2025

Zohran Mamdani’s election as mayor of New York City is not merely a personal story—it reflects a broader transformation within the Democratic Party and in its attitude toward Israel.

In recent weeks, both in Israel and abroad, attention has grown around the campaign of Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani for New York City mayor—a race he indeed won. Mamdani was born in Uganda to a Muslim father from India and is married to a woman of Syrian-Muslim descent. In many ways, Mamdani should be admired by a wide audience in Israel: a young, charismatic leader expressing clear, progressive positions on social and economic issues, green energy, and immigration. At a time when the United States grapples with discriminatory, religious, and nationalist policies, Mamdani represents a fresh, bold, and fearless voice, though some would critique him for carrying careless populist sentiments.

But what draws the greatest interest in Israel are his critical positions toward it—including accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza, describing its policies in the territories as apartheid, encouraging an economic boycott, and declaring that if Netanyahu visits New York, he will be arrested for war crimes. These are the words of the man elected to head the largest city in the United States—the city with the largest Jewish population in the world (larger than in any city in Israel)—and, according to early polls, one who received roughly a third of the Jewish vote.

Although Israel was a prominent topic in the campaign, it was not what decided the election. New Yorkers voted amid rising living costs, urban neglect, immigration problems, and as a protest to President Trump. Yet those who see Mamdani as a “threat to Israel” must understand that he embodies a broader current within the Democratic Party—he is not an outlier, but an authentic representative of it.

A study by the Brookings Institution in Washington examined the statements and websites of 1,400 Democratic and Republican candidates in the 2024 congressional primaries in search of references to the war in Gaza and U.S. support for Israel. The findings reveal the increasingly critical tone toward Israel among Democrats. Virtually all Republican candidates who expressed a position showed unconditional support for Israel, while a large share of Democratic candidates called for an immediate end to U.S. support or for making it conditional on a ceasefire. The gap between the parties is even greater when looking only at those who won their primaries and became their party’s official nominees in the general election.

Similar findings emerge from research conducted at the Institute for Liberty and Responsibility at Reichman University, which examined legislative activity in the U.S. Congress. Since October 7, Republican members have introduced dozens of pro-Israel bills, compared with very few from Democrats. For the latter, Israel has become a politically hazardous issue—one that could damage them electorally or their relationship with donors—so avoidance has become the strategy. Bipartisan cooperation on Israel has nearly disappeared: Democrats abstain, Republicans support.

This partisan divide is also evident in public opinion. Studies from the American Attitudes Toward Israel research lab at Reichman University show that what was once a bipartisan consensus of support has, since the early 21st century (well before October 7), become a partisan identity marker.  When asked to choose between Israelis and Palestinians, the gap between Democratic and Republican voters now stands at about 50 percentage points. Among Democrats, a clear majority favors the Palestinians; among Republicans, support for Israelis remains strong and unequivocal. If anything has changed since October 7, it is the overall decline in support for Israel among both camps—most sharply among young people.

The meaning is clear: Israel has become a partisan issue. The Democratic public views it critically, and Democratic politicians express that criticism. Democratic voters increasingly prefer candidates who take a strong moral stand against Israel—and those candidates, in turn, reinforce the trend. It is a self-perpetuating cycle. Among the younger generation of politicians, unbound by traditional funding considerations and appealing to younger audiences, criticism of Israel has already become the norm.

There are many reasons for this polarization: from the global left’s perception that Israel is not genuinely pursuing peace, to the demographic transformation of the Democratic Party in the United States into a coalition of diverse ethnic minorities. Yet this process also stems from a deliberate choice by Netanyahu’s governments over the past decade to prioritize the immediate support of the Republican Party in the U.S. over nurturing relations with leaders from both parties. This may have benefited Netanyahu personally, giving him political room to maneuver, but it has harmed Israel. The rupture with the Democrats—often accompanied by public provocation—was a grave strategic mistake that jeopardizes Israel’s standing in the United States.

Mamdani is not an exceptional case; he is a product of this process. The concern lies not in his personal positions toward Israel, which likely had little impact on his electoral success, but in the fact that such views are no longer unusual within the Democratic Party. They are positioned front and center in the political campaign. As President Trump bluntly remarked in response to Jewish voters supporting Mamdani, “Any Jew who votes for him is a fool.” The statement may be crude, reflecting a narrow view of Jewish voters as unidimensional, yet it underscores a new reality: America is divided into two camps, and Israel has become part of that divide. In this context, criticism of Israel is now expected of young Democratic politicians like Mamdani. It is reasonable to expect that such criticism will continue to characterize Mamdani as he enters City Hall and will serve as a model for future Democratic candidates in the years to come. The result is a continued erosion of Israel’s standing in the United States.