The 2025 New York City mayoral race has become a revealing microcosm of the broader crisis facing American political institutions today. At its center stands Andrew Cuomo, the former governor whose comeback bid has been tacitly endorsed by the New York Times, despite a legacy marked by scandal and managerial failures. The Times' maneuver-- urging readers to rank Cuomo and leave his primary rival, the democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani, off their ballots-- has reignited debates not only about the city's future but also about the establishment's grip on power and the meaning of "realism" in American politics.
Andrew Cuomo is a member of the Democratic Party's grandee class - a group of wealthy, upper class institutional Democrats aligned with party elders that hold significant sway over the party's politics and operations. This grouping also includes people like Joe Biden, Bill and Hillary Clinton, the Obamas, Kamala Harris and others. They are enjoined with some of the party's mega-donors and deep-pocket supporters who complete this cabal of big money and influential Democrats in the political ecosystem.
The Endorsement That Wasn't-- But Was
Although the New York Times editorial board announced last year it would no longer endorse candidates in local races, its recent editorial urging voters to exclude Mamdani and favor Cuomo functions as a de facto endorsement. In New York's ranked-choice voting system, where voters list their top five candidates and the most broadly acceptable wins, this advice is consequential: with Cuomo and Mamdani leading the polls, the Times' guidance could tip the scales decisively. This is tantamount to an attempt not only to influence the outcome of the June 24 elections but also to engage in an overt, benign-looking form of vote rigging and influence peddling.
The Times' rationale is also telling. Mamdani, they argue, is too young and too radical, while Cuomo, for all his baggage, is deemed a safer, more pragmatic choice. This logic mirrors a familiar pattern in blue-state politics, where establishment institutions and their elite audiencesï ? ? €”often lawyers, financiers, and media professionalsï ? ? €”gravitate toward business-friendly centrists who position themselves as hard-nosed realists. Democratic Party figures like Michael Bloomberg and Rahm Emanuel have long cultivated this image, winning over donors and pundits by contrasting themselves with the progressive left, regardless of their own managerial track records.
Cuomo's Record: Scandal, Spin, and the Persistence of Reputation
Andrew Cuomo's political career is a study in the power of branding over substance. Forced to resign in 2021 amid multiple credible allegations of sexual harassment-- one incident even captured on camera-- Cuomo also faced widespread criticism for his handling of COVID-19, including misleading the public about nursing home deaths and providing preferential treatment to his brother, then a CNN anchor. Despite these controversies, Cuomo's reputation for "pugnacious realism" has endured, bolstered by establishment voices eager for a centrist alternative to the left.
The Times itself once criticized Cuomo for failing to address corruption and allowing New York's subway system to decay, yet still endorsed him in 2018 on the grounds that he was "very capable" in a crisis. This pattern-- overlooking substantive failures in favor of a candidate's perceived pragmatism-- has become a hallmark of centrist identity politics, where opposition to the left is often more important than any positive vision for governance.
In these times I remember Malcolm X's warning about the Republican wolf and the Liberal Democratic Fox. Malcolm told us (I'm paraphrasing) that we "can see the wolf coming from a distance; we can see his teeth, and we know he's coming to eat us. But the fox - liberal democratsï ? ? €”doesn't look threatening; it smiles, drawing you in and before you know it you're caught in its jaws!"
The Real Crisis: Erosion of Trust in Institutions
The Cuomo endorsement saga is symptomatic of a deeper malaise: the erosion of public trust in establishment institutions. As Americans become increasingly skeptical of courts, Congress, the media, and other pillars of society, the media's inability to foster consensus or self-reflection only deepens the divide. Establishment figures, insulated in their own echo chambers, dismiss criticism as the ranting of extremists, further alienating the public.
The Times' reversal of its no-endorsement policyï ? ? €”without acknowledging the change-- exemplifies this dynamic. Rather than engage with the substantive concerns driving support for candidates like Mamdani, the establishment doubles down on familiar faces, hoping that the mere appearance of pragmatism will suffice. Yet, as recent polling shows, Mamdani has nearly halved Cuomo's lead, uniting progressives and gaining traction among Latino voters. The appetite for genuine change is real, and the old playbook may no longer work.
The Need for Institutional Soul-Searching
The 2025 New York mayoral race is not just about Cuomo versus Mamdani; it is a referendum on the credibility of the establishment and the future of pragmatic governance. If mainstream institutions hope to regain public trust, they must move beyond branding exercises and confront the realities of their own failures. Only then can they hope to deliver the effective, competent government that New Yorkers-- and Americansï ? ? €”so desperately crave.
