The Pundits Are All Wrong About Why Mamdani Won

Now that we have a more complete picture of what happened on Election Day, it’s tempting to come to the conclusion that the “America First” movement is in a lot of trouble. Certainly, a lot of commentators are attempting to make that point, from both the Left and the Right. And for the most part, they’re off the mark.

For example, I saw some posts talking about how, in the Atlanta metro area on Tuesday, Democrats managed to flip counties that went for Donald Trump last year by 25 points, 26 points, and 28 points. And those figures sound really striking — after all, how could any county go from overwhelmingly supporting Donald Trump to voting Democrat, in just one year? How could these numbers possibly be accurate, unless MAGA is on its last legs?

The problem with this analysis is that, on Tuesday, turnout in Georgia was only about 20%. Hardly anyone voted because it’s an off-year election. And the race didn’t have any national implications whatsoever, so the people who did vote weren’t saying anything about the Trump administration, or the state of the country, or anything like that. The election in Georgia determined the makeup of Georgia’s Public Service Commission, which regulates utility prices. And people living in Georgia don’t like the size of their electricity bills at the moment, which have increased by about $50 a month since 2022. Electricity has gotten more expensive because more corporate data centers have moved into town, and it’s been unusually warm, requiring more power for air conditioning. And people are frustrated by the cost. That’s really all there is to it. 

Along the same lines, you’ll hear people panicking about the fact that Democrats flipped two seats in Mississippi’s state senate, ending the Republicans’ supermajority in that chamber, which the GOP has maintained for more than a decade. Supposedly, this is a major rejection of the Republican Party in a deep-red stronghold.

But again, the context is important. Democrats only won the elections because of court-ordered redistricting, pursuant to the Voting Rights Act — a flagrantly unconstitutional and anti-white piece of civil-rights era legislation that, as we’ve discussed, is about to be struck down by the Supreme Court. So they redrew the maps in Mississippi on the basis of race, in order to steal more votes. And what do you know? They stole a lot of votes. That’s the whole story. And once the Supreme Court gets rid of the Voting Rights Act, this particular story will never happen again, anywhere else.

Similarly, it’s true that Republicans lost several races in the state of Pennsylvania. Bucks County — the site of Trump’s infamous McDonald’s campaign stop — elected a Democrat district attorney for the first time since the 1800s. Bucks County also elected a Democrat sheriff, replacing a Republican. Additionally, Democrats flipped a number of other highly prestigious positions, including the “Mayor of Beaver Borough” and Erie County Executive. 

But again, you need to look at the context. Trump carried Bucks County by 0.001% (one-tenth of one percent) in the 2024 election. He carried Erie County by just 1%. These were always extremely tight, competitive counties for Republicans. And without Donald Trump on the top of the ticket, it makes sense that some of them would slip away.

And frankly, some of these races probably involved some degree of fraud — or at least, the number of voters was so small that the result doesn’t mean anything at all. Consider the fact that a Democrat won the race for “Clearfield County Court of Common Pleas” in Pennsylvania by 178 votes, or 0.8%, beating a Republican who serves as the incumbent DA. In the 2024 election, this same county went for Trump by 52 points. This is a result that really doesn’t even make any sense, even accounting for the fact that turnout was cut in half. Does anyone really think that voters have swung against Trump by a margin of 51%? The change is so large, and the voting pool is so small, that we can’t learn anything from it — except for the fact that someone should probably audit the ballots.

So what’s needed at the moment is not the usual meltdown about how Republicans are doomed to lose everything in the midterms next year, and how we’re destined for total Democrat Party control of government in 2028. That kind of thinking is never helpful, and in this case, it doesn’t even reflect what happened on Tuesday. Instead, we need to focus — at some length — on the handful of elections from earlier this week that actually do have implications for the party and national politics.

And by far the most consequential result was Zohran Mamdani’s election as mayor of New York. The more you look into exactly how Zohran Mamdani won this race, the more you realize exactly what Republicans need to start doing, if we want to prevent socialists from replicating their success in every other major city in this country. 

Here is probably the single most important statistic.

Credit: @nonewthing/X.com

Credit: @nonewthing/X.com

It’s an exit poll asking voters how long they’ve lived in New York City, along with who they voted for. Mamdani won 83% of voters who have lived in New York City for less than five years. I’ll say that again. Mamdani won 83% of voters who have lived in New York City for less than five years. Cuomo received just 15% of those voters. And as you can see from the rest of the numbers in this poll, the longer people have lived in New York, the more likely they were to vote for Cuomo instead of Mamdani. It’s a sliding scale. Among New Yorkers who were actually born in the city, Cuomo was ahead of Mamdani by double digits.

In other words, the people who have invested the least into New York City — the people who don’t own any property, don’t have family connections, don’t have any ancestral ties to the city at all, haven’t paid taxes for social services or city infrastructure, and who just arrived on a direct flight from the third world — are the ones dictating the future of New York to actual New Yorkers. Again, 40% of New Yorkers weren’t even born in the United States. The word for this situation is not “migration” or “mass migration.” The word is “invasion.” It’s a hostile takeover by people who have absolutely nothing to lose, because they’re not gambling with their families or their futures. They can pick up and leave once they ransack New York. And that’s exactly what they intend to do. They’ll move to another city in another state, and they’ll repeat the process.

In response to Mamdani’s victory, I’ve seen some on the Right make the argument that, in reality, the primary reason Mamdani is so popular in New York is that millions of people — particularly younger people — can’t afford to live in the city. Young adults are getting college degrees that cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars and train them to be communists. And then, when they realize they can’t get a good job with their useless degrees, they decide that capitalism is the problem. Therefore, we’re told, we need to meet these socialists in the middle. We should “feel their pain,” and hold them blameless for their frustration. That’s the path that a lot of commentators are charting for the future of the Republican Party.

One of the problems with this line of reasoning is that these disaffected young adults in New York are voting for the exact problems they’re complaining about. The people who have lived in New York for their whole lives understand very well that rent has doubled in the past few years precisely because New York has imported so many foreigners — people who think and talk just like Zohran Mamdani. As a result of open borders, millions of “newcomers,” as Democrats call them, are now competing with New Yorkers for jobs, housing, emergency services, and everything else. And instead of deporting these foreigners, New York’s government has simply expanded its welfare state to include every single one of them. They all get free pre-K now, free buses, free healthcare, free housing, and free bail when they commit felonies. Over in the third world, that sounds like a pretty good deal. But actual New Yorkers know — through experience, if nothing else — what happens next. Prices go up for everyone. The “affordability crisis” gets even worse. And you can’t solve the problem with higher taxes, because none of the invaders are paying taxes — and all the wealthy, taxpaying New Yorkers are leaving.

But the other problem with believing that the socialists are onto something, and that we should blame capitalism and the financial institutions, is that voters in New York don’t actually care about the economy. Lee Kuan Yew, the first prime minister of Singapore and one of the country’s modern founding fathers, put it this way: “In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.”

And that was obviously the case on Tuesday in New York. Take a look at these exit polls:

White Men are the only group in NYC that didn’t vote for Zohran Mamdani…

Literally White Men vs everyone else. pic.twitter.com/RWdoD6fgaZ

— Geiger Capital (@Geiger_Capital) November 5, 2025

Credit: @Geiger_Capital/X.com

Every single demographic group that’s preferred by the Democrat Party — which is to say, every demographic group other than white men — went for Zohran Mamdani. Black men, black women, Latino men, Latino women, and white women, and every other minority group, all supported Mamdani over Cuomo.

But the one demographic group that Democrats demonize at every available opportunity — white men — went for Cuomo. It’s almost as if, as Singapore’s founding father put it, everyone in this particular “multiracial society” understands exactly how they should vote. They know that they shouldn’t vote based on policies, debates, or campaign advertisements. There’s no time for anything like that. Instead, they recognize that their racial and religious interests matter more than anything else. So that’s how they make their decision. That’s how it works in much of Africa and the Middle East. And that’s how it works in New York, which has now imported much of Africa and the Middle East. Race trumps everything.

And to be clear, when I say that voters choose candidates based on racial factors, I’m also talking about voters who will pick candidates based on pure racial resentment — meaning, their votes are best understood as a vote against a particular racial group. That’s the best way to understand these figures from Tuesday:

84% of women in Gen Z (18-29) voted for Zohran Mamdani…

The most lopsided group. pic.twitter.com/42IgKZCyp5

— Geiger Capital (@Geiger_Capital) November 5, 2025

Credit: @Geiger_Capital/X.com

As you can see, 84% of women aged 18 to 29 — yes, 84% of women aged 18 to 29 — voted for Zohran Mamdani. No other demographic group on the chart has anything close to that margin. So if you meet a young woman in New York, then regardless of her national origin, her race, or her income, she almost certainly voted for the foreign communist who despises white people. And when she gets harassed or assaulted on the train, or mugged on the street, it will be, in a very real sense, exactly what she voted for. 

But how could that be? How could a white woman vote for that? How could she vote for someone who hates white people? It doesn’t seem to make sense. But then you see videos like this one, from Mamdani’s victory party, featuring a former Bravo actress named Jennifer Welch, a woman who has done so much work to her face that now she resembles something like a transgender Willem Dafoe. And in this clip, Welch solves the riddle we’re discussing. Not the riddle about why she has injected botulism into her face and made herself look deformed, but rather the riddle about why she would vote for someone who despises her. She makes it crystal clear how it’s possible for a white woman to vote for a foreign communist whose entire platform is premised on disenfranchising and punishing whites.

Watch:

Jennifer Welch to Mehdi Hasan at Zohran’s victory party:

“Americans have no culture except for multiculturalism… Crusty white people need to learn how to embrace it.” pic.twitter.com/eguyoOPk8l

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) November 5, 2025

Credit: @greg_price11/X.com

She says, “Americans have no culture except for multiculturalism… Crusty white people need to learn how to embrace it.”

Those are the words of the rich white (and probably wine-drunk) actress talking to Mehdi Hasan, who also despises white people, as well as Christianity and the West. This is the unholy alliance we’ve talked about, between foreigners and liberal women. And it’s very clear that both of these groups are motivated by intense resentment and hatred towards the very group of people who built this country and have called it home since before it was founded. That’s all this is. There’s no logic here. There’s just hatred.

They are wretched evil parasites who are openly plotting to erase our culture and identity and replace it with a dystopian communist hodgepodge of third-world dysfunction. In the case of Jennifer Welch and millions of other women like her, they’re not voting to advance their own racial interests — unlike the other people visible in that clip — so much as to express their deep-seated resentment of white men. That’s all this is. It’s emotional incontinence.

And you can tell it’s emotional incontinence because the idea Jennifer Welch presented in this clip — which is also promoted by the Left more generally — does not make any sense. It does not withstand any scrutiny whatsoever. The problem with saying that “America has no culture except multiculturalism” is that multiculturalism is not culture. It’s anti-culture — the eradication of our identity as a nation. Multiculturalism is a kind of culture in the way a black hole is a kind of star. Which is to say it is an inversion of the thing, it is its opposite, it is what happens when the thing is destroyed. That is why, in every single case — every one — multiculturalism has proven synonymous with disaster and ruin.

In Germany, Angela Merkel famously admitted more than a decade ago that attempts to build a multicultural society in her country have “utterly failed.” But she kept the floodgates open to foreigners anyway, who have proceeded to turn Germany into the worst-performing economy in the entire world. As Germany’s chancellor recently put it, “The welfare state as we know it today can no longer be financed by our economy.” Turns out, none of these migrants are getting jobs, but they’re definitely receiving welfare. And they’re also committing crimes — lots of crimes. In the past decade, according to Germany’s government, a total of 136,000 known crimes were committed by Syrian suspects alone. That’s one crime every 39 minutes by a Syrian migrant. Overall, the crime rate for foreigners is roughly three times the rate of Germans — and that’s based on official statistics, which are obviously unreliable. They usually don’t record crimes committed by foreigners at all.

It’s the same story in Sweden, where three out of four murders, attempted murders, and manslaughter offenses are now committed by so-called “migrants” or the children of migrants. According to Sweden’s government, “‘Foreign-born individuals are 2.5 times more likely to be registered as suspected of a crime compared to those born in Sweden with both parents also born in Sweden. For people born in Sweden with two foreign-born parents, the likelihood is over three times higher than for those with Swedish-born parents.” And again, those are the most conservative numbers available.

We could list many more examples of the failure of multiculturalism — from England to France, whose president also declared at one point that multiculturalism was a “failure.”

“It’s a failure,” Sarkozy said of multiculturalism, more than a decade ago. “The truth is that, in all our democracies, we’ve been too concerned about the identity of the new arrivals and not enough about the identity of the country receiving them.” And then, like Germany, France kept importing more and more foreigners anyway.

But no country proves my point better (or with more comic effect) than Canada, which has now been taken over by Indians and Sikhs. Something like 1 in 5 residents of Toronto is from South Asia, according to official estimates. The actual number is probably double that. 

Photo by Narinder Nanu/AFP/Getty Images/File

Credit: Photo by Narinder Nanu/AFP/Getty Images/File

That’s why Justin Trudeau would dress up like a Bollywood star and bow his head and clasp his hands for the cameras. The pandering was not exactly subtle, nor was its purpose.

But somehow, once again, Canada has managed to outdo itself on this front. Meet Graham McGregor, who’s a member of Canada’s provincial parliament — which is basically a state government — in Brampton, Ontario. He’s also Canada’s “Minister of Citizenship and Multiculturalism,” so we’re going right to the source here. Graham just posted this hostage video celebrating the birth of someone named “Guru Nanak Dev Ji,” and then he wishes everyone a “Happy Gurpurab.” But you’ve got to watch the whole thing, because it gets better as it goes along. Enjoy:

Today, we celebrate the birth of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, whose teachings of equality, compassion, and selfless service remind us of the shared values that define Ontario.

Wishing you and your family a very Happy Gurpurab.

Gurpurab di lakh lakh vadhaiyan! pic.twitter.com/SuXC6cmG4C

— Graham McGregor (@BramptonGraham) November 5, 2025

Credit: @BramptonGraham/X.com

Imagine being 50 years old, living in Canada your whole life, and then for the first time, seemingly out of nowhere, you start hearing your politicians talking like this. You half expect the guy to hold up a copy of today’s newspaper, to prove that his captors haven’t already killed him. It’s utterly painful to watch in every way. 

In Canada, the politicians have to read lines like this with a completely straight face. You can see their souls leaving their bodies as they do it. It’s an admission of defeat and conquest. They’re desperately buying time until they’re replaced for good, and they know it. And meanwhile, Canada’s economy — like the economies of virtually every nation in Europe — has stagnated. It’s been overwhelmed by a glut of foreigners who immediately gain access to every social service that Canadians have to pay for. And instead of leadership — instead of someone admitting that multiculturalism has destroyed Canada — we’re left with pathetic videos like this.

It couldn’t be any clearer that identity and culture are prerequisites for having a functional country, or a country at all. Multiculturalism is the antithesis of identity and culture. It is the absence of a common purpose and the absence of stability. And it inevitably leads to a drastic increase in racial resentment and crime and poverty and every other marker of social decay. 

Democrats know all of this. They aren’t making a mistake or a miscalculation. Just like Europe’s leaders, they recognize that multiculturalism destroys nations. And just like Europe’s leaders, they’re going to continue to push for it, precisely for that reason. Multiculturalism is an expression of hatred and resentment, and it always has been. If you’re a conservative and you’re blaming Tuesday’s losses on tariffs, or the economy, or immigration enforcement, or anything like that, then you’re missing the most important factor of all. One more time: “In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.” That’s what we saw on Tuesday. And sometime between now and the midterms, conservatives can either start voting more like Democrats — which is to say, voting as a unified front, in accordance with our common interests — or we can continue sniping at one another, blaming one another, and ultimately losing what’s left of our nation.