In his opinion essay, “Democrats Are Getting Richer, and It’s Not Helping” at The New York Times, Thomas B. Edsall writes, “I asked Mike Lux, one of the founders of Democracy Partners, a consulting firm serving progressive clients, if the rising affluence and education levels of white Democrats weaken the party’s claim to be the representative of the working class….Lux replied by email: “Of course it does. The foundational idea that Democrats are the party of working people (and its corollary that Republicans are the party of business and the wealthy) has grown much more tenuous than it once was. Democrats are lost without that core idea.” …Lux argued that conversations with working-class voters show they “want a candidate and a political party that will fight hard for you. Right now, they don’t think that is the Democrats.”…Both parties have some elements of elitism. The Republicans have a hard case to make when Trump’s cabinet is full of billionaires and they let big business write their own rules, and when they are cutting taxes for billionaires and paying for it by cutting Medicaid and V.A. benefits and food for hungry children…But, yes, the Democratic Party has some elements of elitism. To survive, we need to re-emphasize our working-class identity and that we are fighting for regular folks. We need to not talk down to folks and not spend so much time hanging out with celebrities.”

“Although this is the second mayoral cycle where the city has used a ranked-choice format—final tabulations are set to be run next week—Mamdani, a 33-year-old democratic socialist who has vowed to lower the cost of living in the city, will be the Democratic nominee,” J. Miles Coleman writes at Sabato’s Crystal Ball. “As of this writing, Mamdani leads the field with 43.5% of the vote, while Cuomo is at just over 36%. The third-place finisher, City Comptroller Brad Lander, took about 11% of the vote. During the closing weeks of the race, Lander and Mamdani ran as, essentially, a ticket: Lander told his supporters to rank Mamdani as their second choice, and vice-versa. So we can reasonably expect Mamdani to receive much of Lander’s voters once ranked-choice tabulations kick in. Cuomo has already conceded the primary…While Mamdani was clearly gaining steam throughout the primary campaign, the outcome is still a surprise. Though Cuomo, to say the least, did not leave office in 2021 under ideal circumstances, his name recognition, track record in Democratic politics, and financial advantage gave his candidacy something of an “inevitability” factor. In some years, that may have played to his advantage. But the Democratic electorate, which seems frustrated with national leadership that it perceives as too risk-averse, did not seem willing to simply stick with the devil they knew…But Mamdani didn’t only win with college educated progressives. In Lower Manhattan, Mamdani took most precincts that cover Chinatown. Going back near the “Commie Corridor,” Mamdani got some of his largest margins in the city in the Latino-majority precincts of Bushwick, an area that makes up the heart of New York’s 7th District. During the campaign, one of his visible supporters was Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D, NY-7)—according to calculations by Split Ticket’s Armin Thomas, NY-7 was Mamdani’s best congressional district in the city, giving him 65% yesterday…”

“On a bigger picture note,” Coleman adds, “though Mamdani was behind in several polls heading into Election Day, there were signs he was closing in on Cuomo. The difference—or, lack thereof—between voting methods also offers some support for the idea that late deciders broke to Mamdani. During the early voting period, which took place last week, it was clear that many of the aforementioned pro-Mamdani areas were punching above their weight. So, if Mamdani was racking up a lead with early voters, surely Cuomo would do better with voters who waited until Election Day, or so the conventional wisdom went…So, what’s next in the race? As many of our readers probably know, under New York’s fusion voting system, non-major parties have their own “lines” in the general election, although they can also endorse major-party nominees. In the case of this race, the Working Families Party (WFP), which typically aligns itself with Democratic nominees, endorsed Mamdani last month. Had Mamdani lost the Democratic primary, he could have still appeared in the general election as the WFP candidate…As a bit of a historical aside, Mario Cuomo was similarly denied the Democratic nomination for mayor in 1977 and ran in the general election as the Liberal Party’s candidate, although he still lost to then-Rep. Ed Koch (D). While the younger Cuomo could theoretically continue to campaign under the Fight and Deliver banner, the apparently decisive margin that he lost the Democratic primary by may give him some pause (while Cuomo conceded the Democratic nomination last night, he did not rule out staying in the race)…Aside from Mamdani, and possibly Cuomo, the general election will, to a degree, be a rematch of 2021. Incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, who was elected four years ago, exited the Democratic primary to run as an independent—although, in part because of a litany of scandals, his approval ratings are generally low. Curtis Sliwa, founder of the anti-crime Guardian Angels group, was the GOP’s 2021 nominee and was unopposed for the nomination this year. There may still be some twists and turns in the general election if the anti-Mamdani forces are able to coalesce, although their options for doing so are not great right now…For now, Mamdani’s apparent victory could represent a watershed election in New York’s political history. At a national level, while Democrats nominated center-left candidates earlier this month for the key gubernatorial contests in New Jersey and Virginia, Mamdani’s win this week gives Democrats a much different and much more left-wing candidate than they are fielding in those other significant 2025 races.”

At Daily Kos, slipperyone writes: “Last weekend, the Atlanta Journal ran a report on the possible effects of Donald Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” on rural healthcare in Georgia, and the results weren’t pretty. According to a study by the American Hospital Association, Medicaid cuts in the bill could result in a reduction in funding of $50.4 billion nationally and $540 million in Georgia over the next 10 years. Another study from the University of North Carolina listed hundreds of hospitals nationwide, including four in Georgia, at risk of closing down services or shutting down completely. One of the Georgia hospitals mentioned in the report was in Fannin County, which voted 83% for Trump last year. Another was in Irwin County, which voted 77% for Trump in 2024. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, 310,000 Georgians would lose all insurance if the bill passes…The bulk of those losing insurance are lower-income individuals, who are disproportionately located in rural counties with small total populations. Georgia has 159 counties, many with total populations under 20,000. Without paying patients, the hospitals in these counties can easily become distressed. Further, doctors won’t practice in areas where they can’t make a living, leading to severe physician shortages as well.”