Mayor Eric Adams formally endorsed Andrew Cuomo in a last-ditch effort to stop Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic socialist leading the race. Adams framed the move as a defense of the city’s future, pointing to what he described as Mamdani’s extreme rhetoric and policy direction.
Adams made clear he viewed Mamdani as a real threat to New York’s stability, explicitly citing Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada” as an example of dangerous rhetoric. That line in particular drove Adams’ decision to back Cuomo, a controversial choice that immediately reshaped the race and provoked strong reactions across the political spectrum. For the mayor, this endorsement was less about loyalty and more about preventing what he sees as a radical takeover of City Hall.
Am I angry I’m not the one taking down the socialist, this communist? You’re darn right I am. But this city means more to me than anything. New York can’t be Europe. That’s why I am here, to endorse Andrew Cuomo.
Zohran Mamdani responded quickly on social media after the endorsement was announced, reposting a news headline about Adams’ move and adding the phrase The Art of the Deal in an apparent jab at political dealmaking. His social media team has kept him on message throughout the campaign, turning quick posts and pointed reactions into political momentum. That online fluency has helped him hold the lead even as established figures try to rally against him.
Andrew Cuomo, for his part, has struggled to make serious gains since re-entering the political spotlight. The first mayoral debate did not change the dynamics much, and Cuomo has not yet broken through with voters who are either energized by Mamdani or turned off by the slate of establishment names. Voters who remember Cuomo’s prior record are split, and his campaign has not consistently landed the kind of clear, compelling messaging needed to retake the narrative from a populist-leaning frontrunner.
Campaign observers note Mamdani’s steady debate performance and disciplined social presence as reasons he remains competitive. He has avoided major gaffes, kept composure under attack, and cultivated a base energized by ambitious, progressive promises. That combination has allowed him to outpace more traditional candidates, even when they unite rhetorically against him.
Curtis Sliwa continues to act as a spoiler in the race, polling near 19 percent in recent surveys and refusing to exit despite repeated calls to consolidate the anti-Mamdani vote. Sliwa’s persistence complicates any simple strategy to prevent a Mamdani victory, and his voters could be decisive in a crowded field. From a Republican viewpoint, the split among non-socialist candidates makes the outcome unpredictable and raises the stakes for tactical voting.
The broader political implications are obvious: if a socialist-leaning candidate wins City Hall, it would reshape policy debates on policing, taxes, and basic services in a way many conservative-leaning and moderate New Yorkers strongly oppose. The Adams-Cuomo alignment is a sign of panic among establishment figures who fear rapid change and see preventing Mamdani as an urgent task. That urgency explains endorsements that might otherwise seem unlikely and the sudden flurry of coordinated messaging.
City voters now face a classic choice between a disruptive progressive agenda and a muddled return to a familiar centrist figure who carries baggage. The contest will test whether tactical alliances and last-minute endorsements can reverse momentum driven by energized grassroots supporters. For Republicans and conservatives watching the race, the outcome will signal whether urban electorates can be persuaded away from radical proposals or whether those proposals will keep gaining ground.
Editor’s Note: The Schumer Shutdown is here. Rather than put the American people first, Chuck Schumer and the radical Democrats forced a government shutdown for healthcare for illegals. They own this.
