This past Sunday, when I rode my bike, I was reminded that New York City may be the most bike-friendly big city in the country and possibly in the world. I rode from Kew Gardens Hills to Fort Lee, NJ, which included crossing both the Queensboro Bridge and the George Washington Bridge. Except for a few blocks in Forest Hills, the remainder of the trip had a separate bike lane — some adjacent to vehicle lanes without barriers, others protected by barriers, and some entirely separate, such as on the two bridges and the bike path surrounding much of Manhattan.
In contrast, Yerushalayim, which I visited most recently, is not a very bike-friendly city. Its narrow streets and hilly terrain make cycling difficult, and unlike New York, I saw very few bike lanes or bicycles.
Now, to my main topic. There is broad agreement in most segments of the Jewish community that we must do what we can to ensure that Mamdani does not become the next mayor of New York City. Yet, ironically, some of his strongest critics are engaging in actions that actually help him.
For example, it is clear that the only way Mamdani can be defeated is if his opposition unites behind one candidate. At this point, it has become evident that the candidate best positioned to defeat him is former governor Andrew Cuomo. In an ideal world, the other candidates with a following — Curtis Sliwa and Mayor Eric Adams — would drop out and throw their support behind Cuomo.
Unfortunately, that has not happened, and it does not appear likely to happen. I do not know the exact reasons — whether it’s ego, personal dislike of Cuomo, an unrealistic belief in their own chances of winning, or something else — but the result is the same: They are still in the race.
Thus, it is up to us to make them politically irrelevant. Doing the opposite — raising their profile by inviting them to events as keynote speakers or giving their opinions prominent coverage — only helps Mamdani. Those actions siphon votes away from Cuomo and toward Sliwa or Adams, splitting the opposition.
One of the main lines of attack against Mamdani is his position on Israel. His views are not based on facts but on ideology — and on antisemitism. To Mamdani, Israel can do nothing right and, in his worldview, should not exist as a Jewish state.
However, some of Mamdani’s critics undercut their own arguments by taking the opposite extreme: insisting that Israel can do no wrong and labeling anyone who disagrees as either an antisemite or a self-hating Jew. Those who adopt this approach believe they are helping Israel, but in reality, they strengthen Mamdani’s case. He can point to the extremism of their position and argue that they are out of touch with reality, using it as a defense for his own ideology.
For example, some argue that there is no food crisis in Gaza. To accept that claim, one would have to conclude that every video, every photo, and every independent report showing otherwise has been doctored or fabricated. One would also have to believe that every humanitarian organization — whether private or UN-affiliated — is lying or mistaken. Moreover, it is difficult to defend that claim when Israel does not allow foreign journalists into the area. (The journalists who were killed were local Palestinians, not foreign reporters.)
It is therefore unsurprising that countries historically supportive of Israel, such as Canada, have criticized its conduct. This backlash has also affected public opinion in the United States, particularly among young people, many of whom are turning against Israel in significant numbers.
It does not help Israel’s cause when people rely on arguments that, on their face, are implausible. There are plenty of strong, fact-based arguments to make, but once you adopt an absolutist position, few are willing to listen further.
The same applies to discussions about “settlers” in Judea and Samaria - the so-called “West Bank.” Some individuals argue that no settlers have ever engaged in physical violence or property damage against Arabs in nearby areas. Yet, even the Israeli government has acknowledged incidents to the contrary. This fact-free, all-or-nothing approach undermines legitimate criticism of Mamdani’s positions.
Another group focuses on attacking Democrats as a whole, declaring that the entire party is irredeemably bad. But New York City is overwhelmingly Democratic, and spending time vilifying Democrats instead of persuading them to support Cuomo is counterproductive. That misdirected energy only helps Mamdani.
If Mamdani wins, these three groups — some of which overlap — will likely be the loudest voices protesting his victory and blaming Jews who voted for him. Yet they need to look in the mirror and recognize that they are among those doing the most damage.
Every Tishah B’Av, we speak about how the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash was caused by senseless hatred. What is often overlooked, however, is that it was the Zealots who rebelled against Rome, dragging the entire nation into an unwinnable conflict. The Rabbis warned against their actions, but the Zealots refused to listen. The facts on the ground did not matter to them. Their motives may have been pure, but their actions led to death and destruction for the Jewish people.
Extreme views not grounded in fact are a losing proposition, and, in this case, they will only help Mamdani become the next mayor of New York City.
Caroline is a licensed psychotherapist, crisis counselor, and writer with an office in Queens. She works with individuals, couples, and families. Appointments are available throughout the week and weekends. She can be reached at 917-717-1775 or at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or at facebook.com/pages/Safe-Haven-Healing.