Really insightful and excellent storytelling. My only questions:
What if the early voting slump doesn’t represent a lack of investment, but an intense ambivalence?
What if the real problem is that this district broadly finds itself with reasons both pro and con, for either side in this race?
What if folks are, like me, pro-DSA and want it to be a lasting success, but are also inclined to feel defensive of what Reynoso and the WFP faction built over decades of coalition-shaped trench combat?
I think basically anyone who was politically involved prior to DSA’s emergence could fit this description. This probably makes demographic slicing a tough analytical tool to apply here — except for on the matter of age. But if the DSA/WFP split is substantially real, it strikes me as intra-generational. And those of us who’ve been committed the longest are going to be the ones who remember when WFP was one of the only organizations carrying the flag at all. But we also must recognize that DSA is a more promising and already more successful organizing formation. IMO it is very hard to feel like one or the other is, hands-down, a better choice for the district or for the future of the left in NYC.
All I know is this: if Valdez loses, it won’t mean DSA has no legs. And if Reynoso loses, it won’t mean that we’re happy with DSA being the only game in town. It’ll mean that one of two virtually identical candidates had the better of a complex set of circumstances. I hope folks can resist turning the outcome of what’s looking a lot like a coin toss into a source of fissure. We are all on the same team, and perhaps we’d be better served by focusing on races that remind us of that than picking fights that make us all feel conflicted and demoralized, and give folks reason to feel negatively about a super positive moment in this city that is just full of possibility.
I've got to revisit this. For now, though -- maybe we are, in fact, happy with DSA being the only game in town. Relieved at least that we won't have to deal with the media weaving complex psychodramatics out of whatever mix of outcomes pro and con the DSA was percieved to have achieved.
The Israeli response was immediate, and anyone who had been paying any attention to the apartheid regime or the settlements knew that an outsized ongoing response was coming. It only took a few days for the Palestinian death toll to pass the number of Israelis killed on Oct 7.
This is a test for Mamdani, yes. But it is equally a test for the Working Families Party, which might have controlled the New York left if it had not made years of poor strategic choices while DSA built momentum, discipline, membership, identity, and a cleaner ideological brand. The WFP was born from the old labor-activist tradition: work inside the Democrat Party, pressure it from the outside, use fusion voting as leverage, and maintain just enough independence to keep the establishment nervous. That was the inside-out strategy. It was clever. It worked for a while. It helped make WFP the left-wing pressure valve for regular Democrats.
But now the WFP is no longer the insurgent. It is the middle-aged institution clinging to regular Democrats to stop the DSA tide.
That is why NY-7 matters. This district asks a brutal question: can the regular Democrat survive in the socialist future the Democrat Party created? Reynoso is not a conservative. He is not even moderate in any meaningful national sense. He is a progressive machine candidate backed by labor, WFP, Velázquez-world, institutional networks, and blocs that know how to vote. But against Valdez and Mamdani’s DSA machine, he becomes the “regular Democrat” by comparison. That is how far left the battlefield has shifted.
If WFP loses here, it risks becoming a useless political appendage: a ballot line without a movement, a legacy brand without command authority, a rented vehicle for candidates who can no longer inspire the young left. Its value is still real because ballot lines matter in New York. But ballot access is not destiny. If DSA pushes hard enough and smart enough, it could plausibly build toward its own statewide line by 2029. Then the WFP’s leverage collapses.
That is the future fight: Regular Democrat versus Democrat-Socialist. WFP is trying to be the bridge, but bridges get trampled when armies march across them. In a few years, it is easy to imagine a New York City Council with Democrats as the formal majority, DSA as the aggressive minority party, and a couple of outer-borough Republicans sitting in the cloak room wondering how the city became a socialist faculty meeting. (Sorry, Frank Morano.)
NY-7 is the preview. If Mamdani transfers power to Valdez, DSA becomes more than a comet. It becomes the new organizing center of the New York left.
Thanks for this piece...really informative. As an outsider (Bay Area, CA) can someone explain to me - or better yet, point me to a strong analytical piece - why it matters whether a Velázquez protege or a member of Team Mamdani becomes congressperson. From the point of view of building power to a) advance the interests of workers; b) fighting moderates, centrists, and conservative in City Hall and Albany; 3) fighting MAGA and rising authoritarianism, this race does not seem to be the best use of resources. I get why it matters from the parochial perspectives of DSA and WFP. But I am not clear that it matters from a broader perspective.
It is a very good question and one that is hard enough to answer that it essentially is tough to argue with your conclusion, that this race being competitive is simply very costly for dubious potential benefit. The best explanation I’ve gotten was in this thread, from a couple of people involved in DSA’s endorsement process. https://www.michaellange.nyc/p/dsa-vs-wfp/comment/261938956
Based on that, I think you can apply some bigger principles, larger than either faction’s interest, to the divergence in process and approach to operating (DSA being more committed to democracy, WFP demonstrating the complexity and sometimes legitimacy problems of institutional power.) And you can say that if an intensity of focus on Palestine and ending the genocide is your main issue, Valdez is a more credible messenger on that issue. But you can also conclude that Reynoso has served reliably and competently for broad constituencies — not just the ideologically friendly folks of Ridgewood and North Brooklyn, but of the entire borough of Brooklyn, where he is currently borough President — and has earned the promotion, or even that those constituencies have already signaled their comfort with him as a representative and that derailing that progression points to complicated power dynamics of class, race, and community/legacy. So there’s a lot of things that basically everyone should value that’s at stake either way, and it’s easy to feel like if either one side or the other had just deferred we could have had most of the best of all worlds instead of this weird, overloaded test where both outcomes risk coming at a cost.
thanks for the link to the comment thread. A couple of quick thoughts: 1) my question/concern is not about the internal democracy of DSA or WFP; my question is more about larger power/movement building; 2) I get the idea of running against a weak liberal (Joe Crowley) or some centrist or conservative, but I do not understand it when the opponent is unquestionably part of the progressive wing. I don't think Reynoso's "weak" commitment to the labor movement and socialism is a disqualifying stance - given our overall power in the city/state/nation point-of-view. 3) I found the recent article in the Nation about the political struggles in Black Brooklyn (https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/dsa-black-brooklyn-democrats/) really useful in thinking about left electoral insurgencies and existing power dynamics.
Honestly I would suspect some of the lagging with early voting to be due to the Knicks being a distraction. For real. But as someone in Greenpoint I’ve gotten a Valdez knock & a Won knock but no Reynoso fwiw
An unaddressed issue here is that Valdez is a pretty bad candidate. She hasn’t been able to create much of an identity for herself and remains basically an unknown anonymous assembly member who doesn’t seem nearly as versed in the issues and history of the district as does Reynoso. I think she probably pulls it out, but this has not been a well managed campaign (the Mamdani ads seem far more a rescue mission than anything else).
To quote Yogi the philosopher, “It’s never over until the fat lady sings,” and GOTV wins elections, I live in CD 12, my mailbox stuffed everyday, my neighbors yawn.
Hochul and the UFT bailed out Mamdani, his budget woes were not resolved, just pushed forward, will Hochul and the Dem legislators be as kind next year?
Challenging senior leadership is a sin, you may be next, will they let him sink? and drag down the city?
I agree w the comment by Tim Fritz. I’ve been looking into these 3 candidates and trying to decide—I wanted to be into Claire, but tbh I’m not. She’s just not a super compelling candidate to me. This feels like an unnecessary battle, one that should not define either party. I feel like Valdez was chosen to carry the mantle forward, to test that argument you put forth on whether this is a lasting movement, and not because she was necessarily the best choice. Of the three candidates—I like her least tbh. I voted for Mamdani, I’m inclined to support him. But Reynoso is a more compelling candidate, and he has more experience. I worked for three years adjacent to the federal govt - it is a
morass and it taught me how utterly crazy and nuanced and difficult and specific it is. Reynoso is from this neighborhood, he has cut his teeth, he is progressive. I don’t care when he announced that Gaza was a genocide. I don’t particularly care that he has purportedly taken real estate money. I like his take on the whole thing - this is a broad progressive movement, that includes DSA. They seem to rest her candidacy on her union background and her membership to DSA. The parties are an indicator to me—a big one sure—but not the deciding factor. And yet she is the only one who has cited environmental goals—which is my top issue. So I’m torn. I also really like Julie Won. She was v compelling and authentic to listen to, and had really specific things to say, and credits. Idk this whole thing just feels kinda gross. I’ll support either candidate in Nov., but just not crazy about Claire, and don’t love feeling like I’m being pushed into this.
Super insightful piece! Thank you. I read that the Queens and Brooklyn WFP parties endorsed Valdez but the NY State WFP ultimately decided to endorse Reynoso. Can’t find the citation, but I also heard it from folks in NY-7. I’m curious if/how that influences the WFP bloc… if they will vote the WFP state slate or vote Valdez.
I ran into Reynoso at an event a month ago. Introduced myself as a voter in the 7th district and asked if he had five minutes for a few questions. No, he said, he was too busy, but he promised to call me when he had time. I never got that call.
A week ago, I emailed both campaigns with a few questions and asked anyone to give me a call. The candidate, sure, but really anyone would be great. I haven't heard back from either.
I would understand an incumbent cruising to re-election who ignores a voter. But these two? Do they really want to win?
Nothing about the issues of the race (or mention of Won who presumably hurts Reynoso), which is understandable because this has been a completely substance-free campaign. Both Reynoso and Valdez are weak debaters terrified of controversy (Won better but her actual stances are worse). A really disappointing election and if Reynoso wins this is part of why
Reynoso and is a liberal and Valdez a Mélenchonist, and those policies don’t mix. Claire has to move to the right and Reynoso to the left and meet in the middle, only problem, in the middle is Socialist Paperboy.
That is what elections are for. It’s really time leftist understand that elections are to give voter alternatives on how to govern.
Really insightful and excellent storytelling. My only questions:
What if the early voting slump doesn’t represent a lack of investment, but an intense ambivalence?
What if the real problem is that this district broadly finds itself with reasons both pro and con, for either side in this race?
What if folks are, like me, pro-DSA and want it to be a lasting success, but are also inclined to feel defensive of what Reynoso and the WFP faction built over decades of coalition-shaped trench combat?
I think basically anyone who was politically involved prior to DSA’s emergence could fit this description. This probably makes demographic slicing a tough analytical tool to apply here — except for on the matter of age. But if the DSA/WFP split is substantially real, it strikes me as intra-generational. And those of us who’ve been committed the longest are going to be the ones who remember when WFP was one of the only organizations carrying the flag at all. But we also must recognize that DSA is a more promising and already more successful organizing formation. IMO it is very hard to feel like one or the other is, hands-down, a better choice for the district or for the future of the left in NYC.
All I know is this: if Valdez loses, it won’t mean DSA has no legs. And if Reynoso loses, it won’t mean that we’re happy with DSA being the only game in town. It’ll mean that one of two virtually identical candidates had the better of a complex set of circumstances. I hope folks can resist turning the outcome of what’s looking a lot like a coin toss into a source of fissure. We are all on the same team, and perhaps we’d be better served by focusing on races that remind us of that than picking fights that make us all feel conflicted and demoralized, and give folks reason to feel negatively about a super positive moment in this city that is just full of possibility.
Great comment , Tim!
I've got to revisit this. For now, though -- maybe we are, in fact, happy with DSA being the only game in town. Relieved at least that we won't have to deal with the media weaving complex psychodramatics out of whatever mix of outcomes pro and con the DSA was percieved to have achieved.
Phenomenal Piece. O can feel it. I'll be watching whatever show you're doing Election Night.
Stomach churning. Go Canvas, go vote DSA!
such insights can only come from a person truly tuned into the small rumblings on the ground. well done @michael lange
"Compare that to Valdez, who was immediately outspoken about the war after October 7th"
The only people "outspoken" on October 8th were celebrating the mass slaugher of Jewish civilians.
The Israeli response was immediate, and anyone who had been paying any attention to the apartheid regime or the settlements knew that an outsized ongoing response was coming. It only took a few days for the Palestinian death toll to pass the number of Israelis killed on Oct 7.
This is a test for Mamdani, yes. But it is equally a test for the Working Families Party, which might have controlled the New York left if it had not made years of poor strategic choices while DSA built momentum, discipline, membership, identity, and a cleaner ideological brand. The WFP was born from the old labor-activist tradition: work inside the Democrat Party, pressure it from the outside, use fusion voting as leverage, and maintain just enough independence to keep the establishment nervous. That was the inside-out strategy. It was clever. It worked for a while. It helped make WFP the left-wing pressure valve for regular Democrats.
But now the WFP is no longer the insurgent. It is the middle-aged institution clinging to regular Democrats to stop the DSA tide.
That is why NY-7 matters. This district asks a brutal question: can the regular Democrat survive in the socialist future the Democrat Party created? Reynoso is not a conservative. He is not even moderate in any meaningful national sense. He is a progressive machine candidate backed by labor, WFP, Velázquez-world, institutional networks, and blocs that know how to vote. But against Valdez and Mamdani’s DSA machine, he becomes the “regular Democrat” by comparison. That is how far left the battlefield has shifted.
If WFP loses here, it risks becoming a useless political appendage: a ballot line without a movement, a legacy brand without command authority, a rented vehicle for candidates who can no longer inspire the young left. Its value is still real because ballot lines matter in New York. But ballot access is not destiny. If DSA pushes hard enough and smart enough, it could plausibly build toward its own statewide line by 2029. Then the WFP’s leverage collapses.
That is the future fight: Regular Democrat versus Democrat-Socialist. WFP is trying to be the bridge, but bridges get trampled when armies march across them. In a few years, it is easy to imagine a New York City Council with Democrats as the formal majority, DSA as the aggressive minority party, and a couple of outer-borough Republicans sitting in the cloak room wondering how the city became a socialist faculty meeting. (Sorry, Frank Morano.)
NY-7 is the preview. If Mamdani transfers power to Valdez, DSA becomes more than a comet. It becomes the new organizing center of the New York left.
Thanks for this piece...really informative. As an outsider (Bay Area, CA) can someone explain to me - or better yet, point me to a strong analytical piece - why it matters whether a Velázquez protege or a member of Team Mamdani becomes congressperson. From the point of view of building power to a) advance the interests of workers; b) fighting moderates, centrists, and conservative in City Hall and Albany; 3) fighting MAGA and rising authoritarianism, this race does not seem to be the best use of resources. I get why it matters from the parochial perspectives of DSA and WFP. But I am not clear that it matters from a broader perspective.
It is a very good question and one that is hard enough to answer that it essentially is tough to argue with your conclusion, that this race being competitive is simply very costly for dubious potential benefit. The best explanation I’ve gotten was in this thread, from a couple of people involved in DSA’s endorsement process. https://www.michaellange.nyc/p/dsa-vs-wfp/comment/261938956
Based on that, I think you can apply some bigger principles, larger than either faction’s interest, to the divergence in process and approach to operating (DSA being more committed to democracy, WFP demonstrating the complexity and sometimes legitimacy problems of institutional power.) And you can say that if an intensity of focus on Palestine and ending the genocide is your main issue, Valdez is a more credible messenger on that issue. But you can also conclude that Reynoso has served reliably and competently for broad constituencies — not just the ideologically friendly folks of Ridgewood and North Brooklyn, but of the entire borough of Brooklyn, where he is currently borough President — and has earned the promotion, or even that those constituencies have already signaled their comfort with him as a representative and that derailing that progression points to complicated power dynamics of class, race, and community/legacy. So there’s a lot of things that basically everyone should value that’s at stake either way, and it’s easy to feel like if either one side or the other had just deferred we could have had most of the best of all worlds instead of this weird, overloaded test where both outcomes risk coming at a cost.
thanks for the link to the comment thread. A couple of quick thoughts: 1) my question/concern is not about the internal democracy of DSA or WFP; my question is more about larger power/movement building; 2) I get the idea of running against a weak liberal (Joe Crowley) or some centrist or conservative, but I do not understand it when the opponent is unquestionably part of the progressive wing. I don't think Reynoso's "weak" commitment to the labor movement and socialism is a disqualifying stance - given our overall power in the city/state/nation point-of-view. 3) I found the recent article in the Nation about the political struggles in Black Brooklyn (https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/dsa-black-brooklyn-democrats/) really useful in thinking about left electoral insurgencies and existing power dynamics.
Honestly I would suspect some of the lagging with early voting to be due to the Knicks being a distraction. For real. But as someone in Greenpoint I’ve gotten a Valdez knock & a Won knock but no Reynoso fwiw
An unaddressed issue here is that Valdez is a pretty bad candidate. She hasn’t been able to create much of an identity for herself and remains basically an unknown anonymous assembly member who doesn’t seem nearly as versed in the issues and history of the district as does Reynoso. I think she probably pulls it out, but this has not been a well managed campaign (the Mamdani ads seem far more a rescue mission than anything else).
To quote Yogi the philosopher, “It’s never over until the fat lady sings,” and GOTV wins elections, I live in CD 12, my mailbox stuffed everyday, my neighbors yawn.
Hochul and the UFT bailed out Mamdani, his budget woes were not resolved, just pushed forward, will Hochul and the Dem legislators be as kind next year?
Challenging senior leadership is a sin, you may be next, will they let him sink? and drag down the city?
It’s cruel game
I agree w the comment by Tim Fritz. I’ve been looking into these 3 candidates and trying to decide—I wanted to be into Claire, but tbh I’m not. She’s just not a super compelling candidate to me. This feels like an unnecessary battle, one that should not define either party. I feel like Valdez was chosen to carry the mantle forward, to test that argument you put forth on whether this is a lasting movement, and not because she was necessarily the best choice. Of the three candidates—I like her least tbh. I voted for Mamdani, I’m inclined to support him. But Reynoso is a more compelling candidate, and he has more experience. I worked for three years adjacent to the federal govt - it is a
morass and it taught me how utterly crazy and nuanced and difficult and specific it is. Reynoso is from this neighborhood, he has cut his teeth, he is progressive. I don’t care when he announced that Gaza was a genocide. I don’t particularly care that he has purportedly taken real estate money. I like his take on the whole thing - this is a broad progressive movement, that includes DSA. They seem to rest her candidacy on her union background and her membership to DSA. The parties are an indicator to me—a big one sure—but not the deciding factor. And yet she is the only one who has cited environmental goals—which is my top issue. So I’m torn. I also really like Julie Won. She was v compelling and authentic to listen to, and had really specific things to say, and credits. Idk this whole thing just feels kinda gross. I’ll support either candidate in Nov., but just not crazy about Claire, and don’t love feeling like I’m being pushed into this.
Great article and great reporting. Thank you.
Super insightful piece! Thank you. I read that the Queens and Brooklyn WFP parties endorsed Valdez but the NY State WFP ultimately decided to endorse Reynoso. Can’t find the citation, but I also heard it from folks in NY-7. I’m curious if/how that influences the WFP bloc… if they will vote the WFP state slate or vote Valdez.
I ran into Reynoso at an event a month ago. Introduced myself as a voter in the 7th district and asked if he had five minutes for a few questions. No, he said, he was too busy, but he promised to call me when he had time. I never got that call.
A week ago, I emailed both campaigns with a few questions and asked anyone to give me a call. The candidate, sure, but really anyone would be great. I haven't heard back from either.
I would understand an incumbent cruising to re-election who ignores a voter. But these two? Do they really want to win?
Dude a candidate for Congress didn't personally call you so they don't want to win? Listen to yourself man
Is it possible that all the negative attacks are a turnoff reducing turnout?
Nothing about the issues of the race (or mention of Won who presumably hurts Reynoso), which is understandable because this has been a completely substance-free campaign. Both Reynoso and Valdez are weak debaters terrified of controversy (Won better but her actual stances are worse). A really disappointing election and if Reynoso wins this is part of why
Again? Why is it bad to have a Primary?
Reynoso and is a liberal and Valdez a Mélenchonist, and those policies don’t mix. Claire has to move to the right and Reynoso to the left and meet in the middle, only problem, in the middle is Socialist Paperboy.
That is what elections are for. It’s really time leftist understand that elections are to give voter alternatives on how to govern.
https://theochino.medium.com/aoc-endorsed-a-corporate-democrat-over-a-socialist-bc11737e14a8