Mamdani surge might energize Democrats

When Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker announced that he was going to run for a third term as Illinois governor, local tongues began to wag, and ponder, was he giving up presidential ambitions, or was he using this as a time to solidify his national reputation, after a series of appearances, and blunt criticism of Donald Trump, who in turn, has openly criticized him, and calling him names.

Pulling back from the optics, and the rhetoric, with the Democrats sidelined by the juggernaut of the second Trump administration, it’s going to be tough sledding for them as they attempt to make a comeback, and while it’s been done before after being in the weeds, notably with the election of Bill Clinton; but, they have faced an onslaught of bad publicity, which was ratcheted up when Joe Biden stepped aside, and Vice President Kamala Harris stepped up from the bench, to keep the presidency in Democratic hands.

As we once noted about the failed campaign of Hillary Clinton, the book has not been written on that loss, but we did offer a post mortem, of sorts, shortly after her defeat, it’s now safe to say that Trump won in no small measure by appealing to many of the fears and cultural concerns about Brown and Black people, immigrants, and especially trans people.

In short, the Democrats have a bad reputation, with the reality of Trump’s command of the culture wars in America; and, while some conservative positions  had gone underground after the Reagan years, only to reemerge decades later, Trump brought them forward in a defense of traditional values, and pilloried attempts, starting with the bathroom wars, by others to support these populations.

The great American culture figure, Will Rogers, once famously said: “I belong to no organized party; I am a Democrat.” Aphorisms aside, that may be the central question. What do they stand for? Who can they appeal to?

Framing those questions has become the $64,000 question, and Pritzker raising his national profile, stating pride in defending diversity, affording equality in education, and gender diversity might not win him points with the right, or even the extreme left, but, entering the fray in the city that defines much of urban America, comes Zohran Mamdani who beat out disgraced former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, in the recent city primary, And, in a city like New York, the shock was akin to the election of  American Bishop Robert Prevost to the papacy of the Roman Catholic Church. 

All roads might have once led to Rome but can the tables be turned to allow a 33 year old Ugandan born Indian with an unwieldy name to take on the most embattled and diverse of American cities, Chicago excepting? And, also one that has previously eaten and spit out lesser mortals as they attempt governance. 

Two parts of his plank that have warmed the hearts of New Yorkers are the “bread and butter” issues of historically high rents, groceries, and fears of subway crimes, to mention just a few. The response has been overwhelming, and it’s also notable for the absence of hot button cultural issues, perhaps echoing Abraham Lincoln’s famous words of a house divided cannot stand.

One significant factor is Mamdani’s attraction for younger voters, and as NY Mag reported a Marist poll gave Mamdani a 34 point lead, “among voters under 45”. Coupled with a younger turnout, “voters 25 to 34 have been the largest share of early voters among any age cohort, making up one quarter of the early vote with voters under 45 comprising almost half the early vote.”

If retail politics rule the day, then Mamdani walking from one end of Manhattan to the other, video crew in hand, before the Friday primary election, while his much older opponent, Cuomo, was reticent to reveal his schedule, speaks volumes to a new day dawning for a younger, physically abled candidate which has not been seen in the last three presidential elections cycles; and, while this is a presidential election, it does give a sharper edge to how a Democratic candidate might perform on the national stage.

What might be held against him is the label of Democratic Socialist which might need clarification for some voters, especially if elected and a crop of similarly identified voters are also running for office; but, then again, we've seen this before nationally, with the run of Bernie Sanders, and his socialist tag that joined a debate about who was more progressive, a battle never won.

Then in 2019, there was a presage of sorts with mayoral elections in Chicago, that prompted The Economist to note the upswing in aldermanic races with a surge of Socialist Democrats to state, “Looking past the label, however American socialists are more progressive Democrats rather than Castros in waiting, and their rise poses more of a challenge to the Democratic Party than to capitalism.”

We may see that again, and already with the anti immigration efforts from Trump, he has already, along with others, been talking about Mamdani’s status as a naturalized citizen, and either deporting him, or denaturalizing him, a lengthy process that could rattle his primacy.

Up for grabs, in any local, or national election is the Black vote, something that has factored into the success of any Democratic president since the 1960s, and in the last presidential election played a role in Trump’s victory where more Black men, younger, voted for him giving him a decisive edge.

If we take a look at Mamdani and his voters we see that, early as it is, “young Black voters appear to have gone decisively for him in the NYC primary. According to one primary exit poll (with a small sample size), about 70 percent of Black voters under 50 voted for Mamdani citywide,” according to The Intercept.

For a national candidate, the focus on bread and butter issues can take a sharp turn towards success. but despite accusations of taking the Black vote for granted, the future for Democrats may have to take a turn from traditional transactional strategies to recognizing that Black communities are not monolithic.

It’s apparent that for voters youth matters, and while younger Black voters are turning out for Mamdani, there is also a surge within Democratic circles for Patrick Roath, a young 38 year old candidate vying to win a House seat from incumbent Stephen Lynch, 70, who some voters feel is not only youthful enough, but not as progressive as they need, or desire, as a force against Trump.

Roath, much like Mamdani, is pushing hard for those same “bread and butter” issues that he feels are most important for voters in Massachusetts, such as affordable housing access to jobs. but also to return and redefine the issues for Democrats, admittedly no small feat, in and of itself. 

While some may see this as a way to regain the ground lost in 2024, a return to party roots, Rogers infamous quote aside, may have some traction, especially in the midterms next year, and especially as the president is coming under close scrutiny for his alleged involvement with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, a story that seems to have legs, to use the old newspaperman jargon.

That  aside, considering Roath as an example, there may be some good old fashioned youthful New Frontier “vigah” for his campaign, than establishment stalwarts such as Pritzker.

Part and parcel of Roath’s energy comes also from his moral outrage of the Trump detentions, and deportations, of undocumented immigrants, as the administration attempts to meet a goal of 3,000 deportations each day.

When we take a look at the high cost of housing, especially on the  East Coast as well as across the nation, voters may wonder why this is not a priority of the president. Then add healthcare, or more specifically, the potential loss of 11 million Medicaid recipients from “The Big Beautiful Bill” passed by Congress, then the die may be cast for a path forward.

Still there is some pushback against youth as a factor, and in an interview with WBUR, Bill Curry, a former member of the Clinton administration and Democratic veteran, seemed wary of a “bright and shiny” new candidate, and wants to stress past Democratic legislation, and achievements.

He said that there needs to be more than youth, but instead a return “specific asks” citing past successes such as Civil Rights, for Black Americans, backlash to the Watergate scandal, to jump start the push back against Trump.

June Jobs Reprt: Solid as a rock say some, others?

Holding strong the US Jobs report, released on Thursday, just before Independence Day by the Labor Dept. once again showed strength and resilience despite the “on again, off again” threat of tariffs, and, indeed, exceeded the expectations of most economists, with 147,000 non farm jobs when only 117,00 were expected.

The unemployment rate held steady at 4.1 percent, but  labor force participation was little changed at 62.3.

“You’re not just seeing any feed through for the tariffs as trade related stress,” said Joe Brusuelas, RSM chief economist to Yahoo Finance, and added, “We’ve got an absolutely solid payroll number,” but also gave this cautionary note, “This feeds right into the forecast of a slowing but solid economy.”

There is still economic uncertainty promulgated by President Donald Trump with his tariffs, first announced in the White House Rose Garden, on the so-called Liberation Day, albeit with the fuzzy math that international economists have criticized; and, all of which has not only caused consternation abroad, but for American consumers, the main drivers of the US economy, as they navigate prices from wedding gowns, (most of which are made in China), as well as steel, (ironically used to build Trump properties) and tariffs on aluminum that threaten a supermarket staple: canned goods.

All things considered equal, US employers have held back on hiring, but not enough for a deleterious effect, and with a steady hand on the tiller, the captains of industry are navigating threatening waters.

That aside, wages were up for June by 0.2%, an increase of 37 percent, which, for middle to high income earners allows them to deal with inflation, currently at 2.7 percent.

Overall what we are seeing is a smaller, but still robust, labor market that, much to the disappointment of Trump, will not allow for a rate cut, but as Priya Misra, a portfolio manager at JP Morgan Chase Asset Management told The New York Times, “There is no urgency, they can keep pushing it into the future.”

Stephen Miran, Chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, was ecstatic in the news as well as damning administration critics, when he stated, “Once again proving that the haters and doom sayers don’t know what they’re talking about.”

As reported in the past few months, the heavy hitters are local and state governments with 75,000 jobs, whose numbers may be possibly swollen from those approximate 69,000 federal workers sacked by Elon Musk and his DOGE team; leisure and hospitality at 20,000, education and health at 51,000 and construction increasing to 154,000.

Feeding the national trend with online shopping, transportation and warehouse jobs are holdings steady at 75,000,

The losers? Manufacturing which lost 7,000 workers, and who in April lost 1,000 jobs, and whose losses are caused by a myriad of factors: disturbances in the global supply chains, trade disputes, and tariffs, but also by American manufacturers who invest far less in process innovation, as do other countries, for example, Japan, who has invested, on the main, 55 percent more than Americans have, at last count 23 percent.

Taking a look at overall economic growth there are estimations of only 0.1 percent and 13 percent growth on a year to year basis, while other corporate think tanks, accounting firms, and private investment firms predict slower growth over the next two years, beginning this year between 1.5 percent and 2 percent; with much of that attributable to lowered consumer spending, business investment, and government policy, up to and including tariff policies.

The hits to the GDP (gross domestic product) are predicted to drift downwards by the fourth quarter of this year, with some predicting a recession, and by 2026 a fall to 1.7 percent.

Latest news on tariffs from the Trump administration is that ahead of the July 9 deadline letters will be sent to at least 100 countries that if they do not meet that deadline for trade negotiations, tariffs will revert back to the April 2 rates, between 10 and 50 percent, according to Scott Bessent, US Treasury Secretary, in an appearance Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

While it’s been long known that Trump is not a globalist, the results would further sever not only relations with foreign markets, and increase prices for their goods in the US.

Of course, the biggest news from the administration is that Congress approved is “Big Beautiful Bill,” his term, a signature piece of legislation that encompasses gnarly everything the president wants to achieve as part of his economic and cultural legacy, including making permanent the 2017 tax cuts, that mostly favor the very rich, with only modest income increases for the lower and middle classes.

The greatest concern among administration critics, including Democrats, is that to cement the expiring his 2017 tax cuts, the revenue needed to create them will be taken from a reduction in Medicaid to approximately 11 million people, and whose work requirements for certain recipients, seniors excepted, or volunteer work, and whose monthly reporting may prove onerous, especially to those tech challenged, or without access to the internet to file those reports may find themselves dropped and, the result will see a greater reduction in program coverage.

This coupled with cuts from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) increases revenue enhancement, but will affect individuals, and families, especially those living in states with Medicaid expansion and in combination with the Affordable Care Act, has supported the health care needs of adults, and children, especially those with special needs, both developmental and genetic.

The result is that for those in these groups, their monthly budgets, already stretched thin, will be so even further as they attempt to fill the holes, and pay rent, or mortgages; despite the president stating that a family of four will gain at least $13,000 per year from the passage of this bill.

While economists disagree with him, and point to an assumption of an increase in the GDP, this bill can also affect employment in rural hospitals, since many may close, creating job loss; plus a crisis of care additional costs of care that might not be met by Medicaid, even if some remain open. Joining that concern is that one out of every four people in rural America are on Medicaid.

The biggest result of the bill, originally HR 1 from the US House of Representatives, adds a huge deficit to the US economy, as Factcheck.org noted in early May:

“The bill is certainly not the largest deficit reduction in nearly 30 years – it’s not deficit reduction at all,” Marc Goldwein, senior vice president of the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, told us in response to Leavitt’s claim. The increase to the deficit over 10 years will be $3.1 trillion with interest, according to CRFB’s breakdown.”

In response to the stated benefits from The White House, from Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, they added, “The Tax Foundation, for instance, concluded, based on the version of the bill passed by the Senate Finance Committee, and accounting for the economic growth expected to be spurred by the bill, that the percentage change in after-tax income increases — on average – as income rises. For example, in 2034, those in the bottom 20% of earners are expected to see a 0.5% increase in after-tax income. That percentage increases to 2.6% for the next 20% of earners. Those with incomes in the middle 20% — who earn between $38,572 and $73,905 — would see a 3.5% increase in after-tax income in 2034. The largest increase — 3.7% — would accrue to those in the top 20%, the Tax Foundation said.”

In a further analysis of the aforementioned lower income population, “The Penn Wharton Budget Model looked at the effect of the Senate version of the bill on lifetime income, and factored in the effect of cuts to Medicaid and food assistance. Using a model that takes into account the expected economic growth from the plan, the PWBM found, “that households most affected by the cuts to Medicaid and SNAP — those in the bottom income quintile — experience the largest losses under this bill, averaging $27,500 in lifetime value for the working-age population.”

If the “Big Beautiful Bill”, or B3 as some has dubbed it, was the biggest news over the holiday weekend, then it bears looking at the role of the Federal Reserve, principally its chair, Jerome Powell who Trump has attacked over not lowering interest rates, and sending him damning handwritten notes and also with floating the idea of a shadow chair, possibly Bessent.

We have noted, over several reports over many months, that Powell is data driven and the data and the role of interest rates is dependent on macro economic basics, not political desires. And, one of Powell’s concerns, and data points, are tariffs, especially in their uncertainty; and, especially now with Bessent’s announcements, and effects on consumer prices, which history has shown, will see an increase.