The NY Odd Couple Striving to Make Blue States Work

Is the Hochul-Mamdani partnership built to last?

When Zohran Mamdani beat former governor Andrew Cuomo in New York City’s mayoral election last November, it was broadly assumed his ambitious agenda would struggle to gain traction in Albany. Most of Mamdani’s signature proposals require approval from the state legislature and the governor’s office, and although Democratic governor Kathy Hochul endorsed him seven weeks before the election and even attended a Queens campaign rally featuring Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the feelings of mutual goodwill were contingent at best. Mamdani got his start on the dogmatic, identity-driven wing of the Democratic Socialists of America, while Hochul, who says she is a “staunch capitalist,” was a former upstate congresswoman seemingly versed in the triangulating machine politics of yesteryear. Once Mamdani entered Gracie Mansion, some analysts predicted, Hochul would unsentimentally tame him, much as Cuomo frustrated Bill de Blasio’s progressive mayorship last decade.

The budding partnership between Hochul and Mamdani during his first weeks as mayor has challenged that thesis, raising hopes they might overcome New York’s notoriously prickly upstate-downstate dynamic. On January 8th, the unlikely duo announced the first steps toward universal child care in New York, a $4.5 billion plan that includes “2 Care,” an expansion of existing New York City programs, and new pilots in other counties. That fiscal commitment by Hochul may have been an easy layup to boost her popularity with Mamdani’s coalition. But all the same it was shrewd of the “mom from Buffalo.” Depending on the type of service, the annual cost of child care in New York City typically ranges between $18,000 and $26,000, according to the city’s comptroller. New York is emblematic of America’s middle-class squeeze, and with health insurance premiums exploding statewide, young and prospective families are in desperate need of policies that offset that burden.

It’s possible, of course, that sheer political convenience is driving the mayor’s and governor’s camera-ready affinity. Both are hungry for headline-grabbing policy wins, and tackling child care access and costs had already been one of Hochul’s top priorities. Still, this auspicious collaboration could soon extend to other fronts. And the way each influences public policy—and, to some extent, party rhetoric—could prove to be a two-way street. While Mamdani’s sunny populism has increased pressure on Hochul to govern more boldly, she seems motivated to leave her mark in ways that might likewise help progressives improve trust in government.

---

In fact, Hochul has underscored her commitment to helping the mayor deliver on his vision of “affordability” while touting her own increasingly broad-minded developmental agenda. Like other New York Democrats, Hochul has awakened to the housing shortage and introduced plans to remove construction bottlenecks. In her 2026 “State of the State” address, she unfurled her “Let Them Build” agenda, which would reduce lengthy environmental reviews seen by supply-side progressives and advocates of mixed-use development as a thinly veiled tool of NIMBY litigation. Granted, the policy blitz is helping to lay the groundwork for Hochul’s reelection campaign. Still, to her credit, she had been moving in this pro-development direction well before “abundance” had become a policy buzzword. She first won plaudits in 2022 for throwing her support behind constructing the near-mythical Interborough Express—a long-awaited mass transit project that will connect underserved neighborhoods across Queens and Brooklyn—and has excited transportation advocates with fresh plans to extend the Second Avenue subway. Among her newer supporters—many of them Millennial policy advocates keen to revitalize blue state governance—steps like these show that Hochul is an underestimated workhorse focused on big projects that recall the heyday of midcentury liberalism.

In that regard, Hochul has also emerged as a champion of reviving nuclear power, tacking ahead of other national Democrats on an issue that has divided environmentalists but is seen by others on the left as essential to advancing a viable energy politics that reduces emissions while containing long-term costs. Last June she announced she was directing the New York Power Authority to build a new advanced power plant, emphasizing that energy self-reliance was crucial to strengthening regional manufacturing and supply chains.

This, too, could be an area of agreement between her and Mamdani. Despite the Brahmin left’s ingrained suspicion of nuclear power, Mamdani signaled in a pre-election debate that he supported “exploring” its expansion upstate. It’s a pivot worth watching, given the implications for how progressives discuss climate policy. Hochul, moreover, may help lead Democrats out of the wilderness on an issue that has often exacerbated working-class defections. The left-wing energy analyst Fred Stafford notes that she has hitherto been an unsung proponent of the type of New Deal industrial policies that can and are winning the support of blue-collar voters. Her pragmatic approach, which stresses energy “abundance,” now offers progressives discouraged by the public’s tepid support for climate action a template to move forward amid the Trump administration’s harmful cuts to renewables-based projects.

Admittedly, the notion that Hochul will be key to rehabilitating the Democrats’ national image might strike party activists as a bit far-fetched. Hochul is hardly the most popular governor in the country; despite a steady stream of proposals and actions to change perceptions of what 21st-century New York can accomplish, her so-so poll numbers have only moderately improved in the last year. Other up-and-coming “pragmatic progressives,” such as Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro, are dominating the limelight, and Hochul is an unlikely contender for the Senate or a top cabinet position in a future Democratic administration.

The depth of her support among core Democratic voters is also questionable. Hochul has signed some notable reforms, including bills to ban algorithmic rent-setting and moderately beef up the attorney general’s ability to enforce state consumer protection laws. But her progressive detractors, citing her refusal thus far to raise income and corporate tax rates, still view her as either a lightweight or overly deferential to wealthy interests, particularly big tech and the fossil fuel industry. Climate activists were angered that she greenlit a new gas pipeline last fall, while others were disappointed that she diluted, at the last minute, New York’s new AI safety law. For those already skeptical of her progressive bona fides, Hochul’s boasts that she is reducing “red tape” for business investment and infrastructure upgrades reflect a politics of caution that is seemingly at odds with Mamdani’s vision of active government.

Hochul’s record is nevertheless an intriguing example of what it looks like when a Democratic administration pursues a “liberalism that builds”—an approach to governance that Mamdani seems increasingly keen to be identified with. Mamdani’s allies and critics alike have been surprised by his own enthusiasm for trimming regulations for mom-and-pop businesses and housing construction. Following Hochul’s proposal to reform the State Environmental Quality Review Act, the mayor’s office jumped on the bandwagon, releasing a video in support.

That is a notable shift from the late 2010s, when the left was practically allergic to any “pro-growth” rhetoric. And it shows that pragmatism is not a smokescreen for inaction. Reflecting both the abundance framework and the neo-Brandeisian focus on eliminating market chokeholds, New York’s “new era” promises to challenge the dysfunctional interest group politics that enervated blue cities and states in recent years.

---

Of course, whether or not the Hochul-Mamdani partnership endures will depend in large part on Hochul’s appetite for reform and her determination to implement changes efficiently. Mamdani, mindful of the toxic effects of the Cuomo-de Blasio rivalry, no doubt understands this; regardless of his Obama-esque star power, he will have to stay in Hochul’s good graces and avoid publicized disputes that lead to inertia and hurt Democratic unity at the midterms.

But Hochul plainly needs him too. While she has a strong chance of retaining the Democratic nomination and beating her Republican opponent this November—presumed to be Nassau County executive Bruce Blakeman following Representative Elise Stefanik’s abrupt departure from the race—her victory margin over Lee Zeldin, now Trump’s EPA administrator, was narrow and seen as a harbinger of blue state discontent heading into 2024. Some Democrats, including Nancy Pelosi, even blamed Hochul’s middling campaign for the GOP’s victory in the 2022 midterms. Since then, the impression that Hochul is an underperforming Democrat with no definable, passionate base has been hard to shake.

That might explain why Hochul has warmed to Mamdani and been measured about their disagreements. While a number of Democrats who are strongly pro-Israel or Wall Street-friendly have withheld their support, his charisma and enthusiastic base are otherwise the envy of most national figures. Mamdani, however, has yet to fully reciprocate Hochul’s support by formally endorsing her reelection campaign over Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado, who declared last summer he is challenging Hochul in the Democratic primary. At the risk of being ungracious, it’s possible that gives Mamdani some added leverage over Hochul on his other priorities, like expanding tenant protections and deterring monopolistic price discrimination. And she may well tack further in his direction. As columnist Mara Gay observes, Hochul needs to court Mamdani’s base to drive up her urban turnout and mitigate the conservative tilt of Long Island and upstate New York.

At the same time, Hochul must govern in a manner that boosts New York’s three most vulnerable House Democrats and increases the odds of flipping the seat held by Republican Mike Lawler, a moderate conservative weakened by the expiration of ACA subsidies. Given the Democrats’ perceived disadvantages on sociocultural issues, that raises the odds that she will continue to take a much tougher stance on crime and public safety than Mamdani has. In a less volatile national climate, this difference might not put their relationship to the test. But the Trump White House is a rogue factor whose actions, particularly in the realm of immigration enforcement, threaten to inflame intraparty tensions over how to best fight back while still winning over swing voters critical to a blue wave in the midterms.

Indeed, the partnership’s greatest vulnerability concerns the question of how to handle federal immigration law while protecting law-abiding immigrants with community roots. At the moment, Mamdani and Hochul appear to be united in opposing Trump’s latest threat to rescind federal funds for sanctuary cities. Yet their long-term differences over immigration policy highlight one of the key schisms roiling the Democratic coalition.

Whereas Mamdani embraces New York’s status as a “sanctuary city” and is backed by activists who fervently oppose any municipal-federal-state cooperation that toughens enforcement, Hochul has zig-zagged on immigrants’ rights throughout her career. Upon becoming governor in 2021 following Cuomo’s resignation, she said she had “evolved” on issues such as drivers’ licenses for migrants. But she sparked a backlash among immigration activists when she said after Trump’s 2024 victory she would be “the first one to call up ICE” to deport immigrants “who commit crimes.” Now, as protests against ICE’s aggressive deployment in Minneapolis escalate in the wake of the killing of Renee Good by an ICE agent, Hochul has pivoted again by backing legislation that allows New Yorkers to sue ICE officers who “act outside the scope of their duties.”

That move might be in tune with a public increasingly disturbed by ICE’s behavior—57 percent now oppose its approach to enforcement—but it won’t contribute much to solving Democrats’ thorny dilemma over how to be compassionate while meeting the public’s overall desire for stronger borders. Nor, unfortunately, does growing public outcry relieve Hochul and Mamdani of the tightrope both are walking with the White House. Although Mamdani’s charm offensive in December may have blunted Trump’s desire to undermine him, his rise has put the city and state under the microscope as never before. Any local crisis that fuels allegations of “blue state disorder”—however sensationalist and ungrounded—could quickly dissolve the trust Mamdani and Hochul have built with each other, diminishing both in the process.

Nonetheless, Democrats have reason to hope Mamdani and Hochul can avoid such pitfalls. Mamdani is unusually talented and perceptive in ways that have compensated for his inexperience, while Hochul comes across as the rare moderate who refuses to be cowed. And unlike their listless counterparts in Congress, fellow New Yorkers Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, they are not caught in the headlights, stunned by Trump’s endless shock and awe. Instead, they appear determined to implement popular policies that expand their respective mandates and the Democratic tent. As Democrats search for a blue state model that inspires confidence and pride, the Empire State, against the forecast of cynics, could once more lead the way.