Bulwark Takes - Is This The Smartest Mamdani Ad Yet?

Episode Date: October 28, 2025

Tim Miller takes on the contrast of Bernie, AOC, and Zoran Mamdani’s upbeat campaign messaging with Trump’s push to weaponize the DOJ over 2020 “fraud,” and explains why Mamdani’s economic focus matters for New Yorkers and could be inspiring for Democrats. Watch Chris Jansing Reports on MSNBC: https://www.msnbc.com/chris-jansing-reports

Hey, everybody. Tim Miller from the bulwark. I just got off MSNBC, and we're discussing Donald Trump's full frontal effort now to have his Department of Justice investigate the supposed crime of the century of the 2020 election being stolen from him. Obviously, this is all fabricated nonsense. And we get into a lot of like what that means, how in some ways it's scary and other ways it's farcical, talk about how Donald Trump and the mega right is co-opting these terms of democracy. democracy and doing it with some political effect, annoyingly. And so we get into all of that, and I want you to stick around for it. But first, at the end of that segment, I'm talking about democracy. Chris Jansen kind of pivoted into the Zoron rally last night and asked my co-panel. I love Basil Smichael to analyze that. And she played some highlights from Bernie Sanders, AOC, and Zoramandani's speech at that,

like, really impressive rally and sort of asked him about, you know, how their messaging intersects with these questions around democracy. And I didn't come back to me. I didn't get a chance to talk about that. That's nice to I would have my own channels. Now I get to do some postgame with you guys and give you my takes on that, which I'm sure you're dying to hear. And so I want to play for you that highlight reel that they clipped on MSNBC of the three

speakers and then talk to you about that on the other side and some other things I've noticed about Zoron's messaging. The very forces that Zohran is up against in this race, mirrors what we are up against nationally. This election is taking place when we have an administration in Washington, which every day is moving us toward an authoritarian society. I stand before you tonight as the nominee of a Democratic Party reinvigorated in its pursuit of making government work for everyone,

not just the wealthy and the well-connected. So interesting. Now, obviously, you know, they're just playing like a couple sentences from these long speeches. And while I think it is pretty representative of the way each person spoke, obviously, like they talked about other stuff as well over the course of their speech. And my friend Liz Smith was talking to New York Magazine. And she called this basically Bernie AOC and Zoran, DSA 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0. And point out kind of the different ways in which they talk. And you do see this in just those clips.

So like Bernie is still on message. Dude cannot be shaken off his message. Millionaires and billionaires. You know, the way that he talks about it is going to be an authoritarian regime. Right. And it's very Bernie. It's unique to Bernie. Obviously, all three of these guys have very similar policy views because of the way in which they present them is different.

AOC is next, my millennial girl, and she is doing kind of the woke millennial stuff. You know, there is more focused on identity. Over the course of the speech, she's talking about, you know, Native peoples. There's some checklist on identity politics stuff. She goes after Trump to rousing applause, talking about how, you know, he is, you know, trying to bulldoze a White House that was built by enslaved people. East Wing wasn't, but the White House itself. You know, and obviously it played well in the room.

A lot of people liked it. I saw some buzz about how she seemed presidential to people in the room. But for me, it's a little, it's definitely still kind of kind of, coded towards, you know, kind of the woke social justice left stuff that we were hearing around, you know, the Black Lives Matter protests and things of that nature. And then you get to Zoran, and he really has kind of dialed in on the affordability, dialed in on the cost of living, dialed in on making New York a better place to live for everybody.

And he does so, he's in a much cheerier way, happy warrior, manner. His manner is just much happier and smilier than Bernie's, of course. And of course, again, like he mentioned some of the identity politics, stuff, but the emphasis is different than what you see from AOC. And I don't know, I think that it works. And here's why I think it works. There's basically two groups that the Democrats need to think about. And particularly left populist Democrats need to think about. Like, if you're a DSA candidate, you're like, How do I get left populist policies to be successful as a political matter, right? And, you know, we've seen it in the cities, but how can you broaden that out to, you know, make it more of a successful movement in swing states and in other places?

Well, for starters, you've got to do better with poor, low-income voters, particularly from traditional Democratic constituencies, black voters, Hispanic voters, Asian voters. and the Democrats are not doing that well. They've at least lost a lot of ground in that demo. There's a new study out today. I'm going to go deeper on this tomorrow with Sam Stein, but it kind of looks at where the Democrats have lost ground over the course of the last 10 years. And it has been the most acute in, like, poor neighborhoods that are, you know, either poor black neighborhoods.

One was in New York. It was a poor neighborhood filled with Chinese immigrants, mostly. And so if you just look at the precincts where they're losing ground, It's a lot of these poor voters of color. If the DSA is going to work, they got appeal to those voters. Like, that has to be their bread and butter. If left populism is going to work, they got to appeal to those voters. And I think that a lot of those voters were turned off about some of the cultural moves that

the Democrats made. That same study, talked about how Democrats started talking more and more about social issues and climate issues and less and less about economics. And so that's like the theory of the case for left populism. Like, they can reengage those voters by focusing on economics. I think that probably would help to also dial up back a little bit on the culture stuff. And I think that's where Zoran's a little better than AOC, frankly, in his message positioning. But that is one group.

And the other group, which is why I feel so suited to talk about this, is me. If left populace are going to win, they've got to do better with those traditional Democratic constituencies. But then they've got to hold on to the people that have come into the Democratic coalition during the Trump era, you know, who are not going to share. all of their economic policy views, but who want to know that their policies are not so extreme, they're not trying to burn everything down, that they're not scary, you know, that we, those of us who left the Republican Party over Trump do not want to replace right-wing illiberalism with left-wing illiberalism, right? You want to make sure that there's going to be some continuity with traditional American values

more as norms, right? And interestingly, I think that the ways are on talks is more appealing both to my people, right? These former Republican types, the swing voters, the suburban moms, and to the working class or even, you know, kind of bottom of the income bracket voters that the Democrats have laws ground with. And I think it's because his manner, the way that he talks, the way that he presents it where his emphases are, it is on stuff that is net less alienating

than we've seen from some of the progressive identity and left other candidates, particularly over the course of the last decade. So I want to give you another tangible example of this. That is the ad that Zorn was running on Fox News

that I just thought was really smart and clever and well done. Let's watch Zoran's Fox News app. Socialists. Don't rant. Hey, I'm the actual czaram, I'm Donnie, not the guy they talk about on this channel. My radical agenda, turn the page on the billionaire-backed politics of Andrew Cuomo. Okay, so there you go. So what is he talking about there at the start?

It is in the Bernie tradition and something that I think is gaining more and more popularity for a variety of reasons, which we can get into it a later date. But there's going after the billionaire class, I think, works, going after the billionaire-backed policies of Andrew Cuomo, works. and has a ring of truth to it, and I don't think is really turning too many people off. Then you go over. What does he talk about that? What does he want to do? Make the city more affordable?

Keep New York City safe and tackle government waste. Tackle government waste. Again, that is stealing, borrowing from the abundance left or the small government, right-wingers. Obviously, Democrats are talking about this, but you don't hear that a lot from the DSA types. Zoran did that when I interviewed with him, really focused on that,

about how he thinks that people that want bigger government. It should also be really important incumbent upon them to talk about and care about ensuring that government works efficiently, which is just logical. If you're going to sell government to people, you have to sell them a product that they think it works for them. So he's on Fox. He's using some traditional conservative tropes about the government. And he's saying directly,

They're like, I'm not scary. I'm just not doing the billionaire dirty work like Andrew Cuomo is. Let's watch the end. Make the city affordable. Tackle government waste. Keep New York safe and deliver on our promises. With universal childcare, rent that you can afford, and a property tax system that actually makes sense.

So don't be fooled by the noise. This is who I am. And you're who I'm fighting for. Paid for by Zoron for NYC. Okay. Danny lists out what his actual tangible promises are. Universal child care, something that is badly needed in this.

country that is not something that's scary going to turn people off making rent affordable unless he's not using like a socialist buzzword there it's just about making rent more affordable to people some of the policy of specifics on that someone the right might not like but but just as a general matter like that is something people want housing is too expensive affordability is at the top of everybody's interest and then he talks about property tax reforms he's going into fox to delivering that ad and i just don't think that anybody watching that fox out i mean there There might be people that don't like them because of other things they've heard about them or racism or just, oh, he's a socialist, so I'm not even going to listen. I can't even hear what's coming into my head.

But for the people that are open to hearing it, the message isn't scary. It is optimistic. It's forward-looking. It's responsive to people's concerns. It's marking the real foes as the billionaire class, not as mega-Americans or anything like that. And he does it with a smile. And it just, I think it is an appealing synthesis of what his DSA forebearers have left him. And I think that if a Democrat can focus on that and execute this, obviously he's aren't going to run for president.

He's foreign, foreign born. You know, I think that is something that can be broadly appealing. And I think that the way that he's presented. presenting himself in the way that he talks about, it really matters. And I just think that this stark scene of me sitting there and watching that highlight reel of Bernie and then AOC and then him, I just, as somebody who is conceivably one of the target audiences for left populism, how do you win people like Tim over? I was just looking at it and saying, I think that Zoron has found a messaging substance and style that is preferable to some of what we saw coming before them.

So we'll see how that all shakes out. I wanted to, it's worth sharing. This is why you come to this page, right? So you can get the extended version, the extended cut of the cable hit. You know, you want to know it was really going on in my mind when they asked me a four 45 second sound bite? That's what I'm giving you right here on this channel.

So subscribe to the feed. But stick around. We got into a bunch of other stuff with Chris Jansing and Basil Smichael on this democracy question. And it was some material I didn't get to on the pod today that I think is worth talking about about what Donald Trump is doing with the OJ right now in response to his hallucinations about 2020. So stick around for that, subscribe to the feed, comment, tell me what you think.

Appreciate that. I do my best to check him out and hear from you guys and be responsive to it. So let me know what you think. We'll be talking to you soon. Tim, deconstruct this for us because in a sense, both sides are arguing we're fighting for democracy. Democrats have been saying that, I would say, since 2016. they say Trump threatens democracy. He says that he lost in 2020

because democracy was, you know, that the democratic norms were not in place. Who's winning this fight? Does it matter in terms of messaging? Well, Trump won the last election. So I guess he won the fight when it comes to just look at this purely in politics. And part of this is, I think, speaks to

why democracy is a standalone issue is a weak political issue for the Democrats to focus on. And obviously it's very important on the substance I'm going to get to in a second, but it's for the reason you just laid out is that it's kind of esoteric. Donald Trump has convinced his base of the lie that the election was stolen from him in 2020 or that it was unfair in some way, which is obviously not true. But so then when you poll people and say, do you care about democracy?

It's like both sides say yes, because the Republicans are talking about how they think that the 2020 election was stolen. So, I mean, obviously on the substance, it's the Republican side that is wrong on this. It was Donald Trump that tried to overturn the will of the people in 2020. That's why it's kind of an ominous statement there where he says at the end that they don't get this fixed, this will happen again. I think a lot of us are worried that this is going to happen again with this being in 28, you know, Donald Trump trying to stay in power or do things to over to subvert or overturn the will of the people. people as he did in 2020.

So, you know, look, I think that this, sending the DOJ after people is a complete undermining of the way that the Department of Justice works and our democratic norms, and I think it's alarming, on the one hand. On the other hand, this is all based on a lie. I mean, like Fox had to pay $700 plus million because of this lie. There's been no evidence of it. They've tried to prove it. And he can send the Department of Justice down a rabbit hole going after his fantasies.

But I don't know that it's actually going to yield anything. Tim, let me ask you. Well, actually, let me play for you what the House Minority Leader, Hakeem Jeffrey, said at an end of ACP rally. This was in support of Letitia James, the New York AG. Wickedness in high places. Folks who would rather shut down the government than provide health care to everyday Americans. people who have weaponized the Department of Justice.

I've come to the conclusion that while Jim Crow may be dead, he's still got some nieces and nephews that are alive and well, running around Washington, D.C., and the rest of the nation. Tim, wickedness in high places is an interesting rallying cry that echoes kind of what Letitia James herself said, which is that Trump is taking a wrecking ball to our values.

Is this ultimately, if they can go after Tish James, we're all in danger? I actually kind of like the way that you phrased that question at the end better than how the minority leader talked about it, right? Some of it is, I agree with what he's trying to say,

but I wish the Democrats would just say it more bluntly rather than kind of talking about it in the way of like, again, Jim Crow, you know, the fate of democracy and wickedness. But what is happening, bluntly? Donald Trump is going after his political foes. Like, Donald Trump has, they have created essentially, you know, propped up fake reasons to go after people that he doesn't like,

using the power of the government. The American people are not for this. They don't want a government where you're going to have the justice department, the most powerful people that have the power to subpoena you, that have the power to jail you and imprison you, come after you because, like, the president, doesn't like you or doesn't like what you said or because who knows what could be next what you said on social media that is what's happening here in this letitia in the tish james's

case like going after her over the second mortgage is is totally preposterous and the only reason they're going after her is because Donald Trump wants revenge and that's not a way that we want to run our government in this country