It’s safe to say that the 2025 Mayoral election has become one of the biggest events this decade, rivaling that of a presidential race. The mayoral race itself was relatively close, with the race results being ~ 51% Mamdani to 42% Cuomo; if not for Curtis Silwa taking some votes away from Cuomo and Mamdani, it could’ve edged closer to 50/50.
NYC became the spotlight of the world for a couple months, with people worldwide eager to see how newly sworn in Mayor Zohran Mamdani will perform in office. What those outside the city may not understand is that, at least statistically, the city has been slowly dividing itself these past few years.
To really understand how much of an anomaly this election was, it’s best to go back a decade to previous elections. The 2017 mayoral race had De Blasio win with ~ 66% of the vote and Malliotakis being the closest with only ~28%. The 2021 election had a similar outcome, with Eric Adams beating Curtis Silwa ~ 67% to 28% respectively. The city almost always has a general consensus on who the new mayor will be, but this election was one of the closest elections the city has seen in its history, suggesting that the city was indecisive of who to vote for this time. Still, the election had one of the biggest voter turnouts in its history as well. Giving more context to the neck and neck race.
As for the candidates themselves, both Cuomo and Mamdani are two extremely unique candidates. As this is one of the only times where we see a Democrat candidate go up against another Democrat-associated candidate. The last time this happened was in 2001 and 2005, with Michael Bloomberg (ex-Democrat who shifted republican and then to Independent) winning two elections against Democrat candidates. This time, it was Cuomo who was a Democrat at first, then ran as an independent. In the end, he was an independent with a notable republican support, going as far as getting an endorsement from President Trump. Originally, it was a Democrat vs Democrat showdown, with it turning into a Democrat vs independent with strong republican support only a few months later.
This pattern of scattered voting continues on the national level as well, with presidential elections also shifting significantly. The 2024 Presidential Election saw NYC significantly swing red, which historically is abnormal. Compared to Barack Obama receiving 62% of the city’s vote, Kamala Harris only received 55% of the vote 16 years later. In fact, neighborhoods across the 5 boroughs showed significant shifts towards Trump from 2020 to 2024. Corona, Queens, for example, showed roughly a 20% increase in approval for Trump. Although it could come down to differences in campaign; it still reflects an overall decline in support of the Democratic Party. What was once a guaranteed blue city now seemingly is turning more conservative over the years.
For someone like Zohran Mamdani, a self-proclaimed Democratic socialist, to win the vote for mayor as narrowly as he did, you cannot help but wonder; just where exactly does New York City stand at the moment? Does it really come down to Conservative vs Democrat? Or is there more than meets the eye?
Andrew Cuomo and “Stability”
Having a new mayor can be overwhelming for any city, let alone a mayor as vocal and novel as Mamdani. It’s quite evident that his campaign was heavily against ICE and Trump’s administration, consistently denouncing Eric Adams’ support and collaboration for ICE arrests in the city. In fact, one of the first viral videos that Mamdani garnered in his campaign was a video of him yelling at Border Czar Tom Homan. Meanwhile, Cuomo didn’t necessarily support ICE and Trump, but he did proclaim neutrality and led with experience in his campaign. Although that was his campaign idea, Mamdani argued that it was a “cowardice” way of dealing with the situation. It can easily seem like it was a “Red vs Blue” topic, considering Trump’s constant battle with Democratic leaders on the topic of ICE. However, both Cuomo and Mamdani voters downplay the actual importance behind those political values. Rather, it was mostly retrospective when it came down to Cuomo supporters. While Mamdani supporters demonstrated a prospective perspective.
David Kaplan, for example, voted for Cuomo specifically because of the “neutrality” he provided separate from ICE. David, when asked about Mamdani’s vocalized anti-Israel views, voiced a notable concern for possible Jewish hate in the future. “His views could lead to Jewish hate. I don’t know if he understands that.” David represents a significant view point that many of the Cuomo voters had in the city regarding Mamdani, the extremism behind his campaign. In this case, his stance with Palestine and Israel. With Cuomo, voters knew what they were voting for, someone who was neutral and empty of a polarizing opinion. Someone who had experience in governance, a “safe” option.
“He ran as governor before, he knows how things work,” reinforced Michael, a New Yorker who voted for Cuomo in November, but didn’t offer his last name. “That kind of stability, it’s something that other candidates simply lacked,” he expressed, introducing the idea that it wasn’t necessarily the politics of Cuomo that were alluring, but rather his stability. When asked about Cuomo’s past sexual assault allegations in 2020, and the impact it may have had on his vote, Micheal mentions that they were on his mind, but ultimately not a smoking gun. “I feel like he had already gone through the investigations. I was voting based on who I trusted to actually run things.” he explained.
Others were skeptical of Mamdani’s promises, believing they wouldn’t amount to much. Even those who consider themselves progressive, such is the case with Alex Moreno. Alex attests to voting for Kamala during the presidential race of 2024, but couldn’t vote for the Democrat frontrunner in this election. “Mamdani felt like he was just doing too much, you know? Some of those policies felt too good to be true.” Despite not voting for him, Alex hopes that Mamdani will accomplish his goals while in office, although he doesn’t “expect much.”
When asked whether Trump’s endorsement for Andrew Cuomo changed anything, they all voiced apathy towards it; as it had nothing to do with what they voted for. Suggesting that Cuomo’s political affiliation had nothing to do with the vote, rather it was his neutrality in the face of what they saw as extreme in Mamdani.
Zohran Mamdani and His Promise for Change
Those who supported Mamdani show overall excitement and swoon over the possibilities promised under his campaign. “What I heard from Mamdani were policies about housing, affordability, and dignity; things that actually affect people like me and my community,” explained Amina Hassan, a supporter who’s been backing Zohran Mamdani since the Democratic primary. When asked about Andrew Cuomo’s sexual assault controversies in the past and their role in her support for Mamdani, Amina expressed that it played a significant role. “That was a big reason I couldn’t support him. It wasn’t just political, it felt like it was a values situation.” Some voters like Micheal demonstrated general apathy to Cuomo’s allegations, while others like Amina felt intense opposition towards it, opting to vote for Mamdani instead. Suggesting a quiet but significant factor in the election’s results. Amina also believes that Mamdani can bring change for her immigrant community and others like it. “It meant something to see someone who didn’t shy away from standing up for immigrant communities,” she shared.
The affordability campaign specifically is what convinced many New Yorkers. “It feels like the city’s been stuck, and he was the only one really pushing for change,” Chris Alvarez said. “The city’s been stuck on hoping for change, but never achieving it.” Chris believes that Mamdani’s policies are achievable and plausible.
“Mamdani feels real. He’s different” he said.
Even those who weren’t completely sold on Mamdani, decided to vote for him due to the optimism he brought with his campaign. Jordan Lee, for example, expressed a level of doubt regarding Mamdani’s campaign, but ultimately felt that it reached him the most.
“I felt like he was speaking more directly to the cost-of-living stuff and housing,” Jordan said. “It’s what I’m dealing with every day, you know?”
The promise of change and improvement is what brought most Mamdani supporters to vote for him. Which provides an undeniable juxtaposition with Cuomo supporters. It came down to whether people were willing to vote for big change in the form of Zohran Mamdani or vote for stability/neutrality in the form of Andrew Cuomo.
New York City’s “Divide”
There is some truth to the statement “NYC is becoming polarized,” just not in the way most people think. if this counts as “polarized”, then the city has been “polarized” since Bloomberg’s candidacy. The divide comes with approaching change in the city: should citizens reach for a leap in progressivism and policies or should they be more grounded and “realistic?” The city has shown patterns of prioritizing policy over party.
Bloomberg is a mayor who shifted from democrat, to republican, to independent in the span of 8 years, yet he still was elected as mayor in that timespan. If NYC was truly focused on the political parties, it would’ve reflected then. However, it wasn’t his political party that won him the mayoral elections; it was his policy and campaign. The city has done the same in 2025.
Cuomo didn’t represent a conservative, heavily pro-ICE city, rather he represented New Yorkers that worried Mamdani’s campaign was too idealistic, with some calling the policies “dreams” and simply impossible to achieve. In an already difficult economy, where over 50% of New Yorkers are in poverty or are low income, Mamdani represents too big of a risk. Cuomo’s political affiliation or endorsements had nothing to do with his votes. It came down to retrospective voting, the comfort of government stability, and pragmatism in city leadership.
Mamdani didn’t represent a radical Democratic-socialist movement, rather he represented New Yorkers who wanted change and the promise for a better city. People who felt that the city was going nowhere, or wasn’t allocating to their needs. Whether on Mamdani’s outspoken criticisms of ICE or his consistent message of affordability, it spoke to numerous New Yorkers who weren’t afraid of attempting this change; believing that Cuomo’s neutrality or past controversies wouldn’t bring the change they seek in the city’s government.
New York City decisively made its choice in November, with Mayor Mamdani doubling down on his promises. Already having achieved the milestone of free universal childcare for kids aged 2 and under, it’s only a matter of time until we see whether the Mayor can fully convince those who are skeptical, or if the divide grows ever more.
