Is the Democratic Party about to score an own goal with Zohran Mamdani’s rise in the New York mayoral race? Bill Maher, the sharp-tongued host of "Real Time," certainly thinks so, sounding the alarm on what he sees as a troubling direction for the party.
The New York Post reported that on an episode of "Real Time," Maher didn’t hold back, targeting Mamdani’s associations and background while debating CNN commentator Kate Bedingfield on the potential fallout for Democrats nationwide.
Maher’s primary concern zeroed in on a photo of Mamdani alongside Siraj Wahhaj, described as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and a character witness for the attack’s organizer, Omar Abdelrahman.
"Well, he campaigned this week with a guy who was an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing," Maher stated on his show. That’s a tough optic for any candidate, let alone one vying to lead a city still scarred by terrorism.
Mamdani, for his part, pushed back on the criticism during a "Cost of Living" soccer tournament in New York, noting that Wahhaj had previously met with former mayors Michael Bloomberg and Bill de Blasio, and even campaigned with Eric Adams without similar uproar.
"The same imam met with Mayor Bloomberg, met with Mayor de Blasio, campaigned alongside Eric Adams, and the only time it became an issue of national attention was when I met with him," Mamdani argued. But let’s be honest—timing and context matter, and running for mayor in a post-9/11 New York amplifies every association.
Maher also took issue with Mamdani’s dual citizenship with Uganda, a nation with harsh policies toward the LGBTQ community. He suggested that holding such ties while running for office sends a conflicting message about values, especially for a party that prides itself on progressive ideals. It’s a fair question: Shouldn’t a candidate’s affiliations align with the city’s core principles?
Adding fuel to the fire, Maher defended former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who faced backlash from the left for implying Mamdani might not be the right leader in a crisis like 9/11.
Cuomo’s comments were harsh, no doubt, but Maher seems to agree that Mamdani’s profile could raise doubts about steady leadership. It’s a jab that stings, especially when trust is the currency of public office.
The debate with Bedingfield on "Real Time" revealed a stark divide within the Democratic camp. While Maher warned that Mamdani’s potential victory could tarnish the party’s national image, Bedingfield countered that it might energize disengaged voters. Her optimism feels like a gamble when the stakes are so high.
Maher sees the New York mayoral race as a bellwether for the Democratic Party’s direction, with the entire country watching. A win for Mamdani, in his view, could signal a shift too far left for many moderate voters to stomach. It’s a reasonable concern when purple districts are already a battleground.
Bedingfield, however, argued that centrist Democrats could use disagreement with Mamdani to carve out their own credibility in swing areas. It’s a clever strategy—distance yourself from the far left while still under the party banner. But does that really solve the problem of a fractured image?
Maher’s critique of Mamdani’s Ugandan citizenship cuts deeper into questions of allegiance and values. Uganda’s policies on LGBTQ rights are at odds with the progressive platform Mamdani claims to champion, creating a contradiction that’s hard to ignore. Voters deserve clarity on where a candidate stands when the policies of their other homeland clash so starkly.
Mamdani’s campaign has yet to respond directly to these specific criticisms, leaving room for speculation and doubt. Silence in politics is rarely golden—it often fuels the narrative of your opponents. A clear statement could douse some of these flames.
Meanwhile, Maher’s broader point about the Democratic Party’s trajectory resonates with those wary of a leftward lurch. If New York, a liberal stronghold, elects a candidate with such polarizing ties, what message does that send to the rest of the nation? It’s a question worth pondering as the race heats up.
Bedingfield’s perspective, while hopeful, seems to underestimate the risk of alienating centrist voters who might see Mamdani as too radical. Her idea of galvanizing a coalition sounds nice in theory, but politics isn’t played on paper. Real voters in real districts might not buy the unity pitch.
At the end of the day, Maher’s warning is a wake-up call for Democrats to think hard about their brand. Mamdani’s candidacy, with its mix of controversial associations and dual citizenship, could either redefine the party or drag it into a quagmire of public doubt. The choice is theirs, but the clock is ticking.
