Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), in a private meeting with House Democrats in Washington on Wednesday, avoided confronting Zohran Mamdani, the far-left Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, over his controversial defense of calls to “globalize the intifada” and fierce opposition to Israel.

Gottheimer, a moderate Jewish Democrat who is among the most outspoken supporters of Israel in the House, has not been shy about publicly calling out members of his own party when disagreements over Israel and antisemitism have arisen in recent years.

But during the breakfast meeting this week, Gottheimer did not bring up his objections to the 33-year-old democratic socialist, according to a House aide familiar with the matter, even as his views on Israel have raised alarms among Jewish voters and faced pushback from Democratic leaders who have so far withheld endorsements in the New York City mayoral race. 

In a statement, Gottheimer reiterated his concerns about Mamdani’s progressive policy proposals and his acceptance of rhetoric that Jewish leaders have condemned as antisemitic. But the New Jersey congressman suggested he was willing to hear from the mayoral nominee about his stunning primary upset that has rattled the political establishment.

“I don’t think higher taxes, anti-job creating socialism, and an acceptance of antisemitic rhetoric is the right direction for America,” Gottheimer told Jewish Insider, echoing comments he shared in an interview with CNBC on Thursday morning and elsewhere in recent weeks. “That said, I am always open to learning how I can reach more people with my commonsense, problem-solving approach.”

He declined to comment further on the meeting to JI on Thursday. “I don’t have anything to say beyond what I put out,” the congressman said.

Later on Thursday, Gottheimer announced he was introducing a bipartisan resolution condemning the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which Mamdani has refused to condemn. The motto chanted frequently at anti-Israel demonstrations is “hate speech, plain and simple,” the congressman wrote in a statement that did not mention Mamdani, arguing such words “incite violence, fuel hate and put Jewish families at risk.”

Still, Gottheimer voiced no such disapproval in the Wednesday breakfast hosted by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) — which included several progressive House Democrats and was promoted as a “communication and organizing” session as the party rethinks its messaging strategy ahead of next year’s midterms.

Gottheimer’s reticence to speak out directly during the in-person meeting stands in contrast with his past denunciations of Mamdani, whose defense of the “intifada” phrase — seen by critics as a violent provocation to target Jews — he has called “insane and unacceptable” amid rising antisemitic activity.

The divisive slogan “is a well-known antisemitic chant that calls for the eradication of Israel and violence against Jews,” Gottheimer said in a social media post a week before the primary last month. 

“Zohran Mamdani’s pathetic, hateful lies are a blatant slap in the face of the Jewish community,” he added. “He must apologize immediately. I also suggest that he visit the Holocaust Museum in the coming days and learn why these words are so dangerous.”

Even as no discussion of Israel or antisemitism was raised at the Wednesday gathering, top Democrats have continued to signal their hesitation regarding Mamdani’s approach to such issues, particularly his stance on the “intifada” slogan that he has defended repeatedly as an expression of Palestinian rights.

For his part, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who did not attend the breakfast but is expected to meet with Mamdani in New York City on Friday, has said that the nominee’s comments about the phrase will be a part of their discussion — suggesting that his support is likely contingent on a change in tone.

Mamdani, who has faced questions about the phrase in other meetings this week, has privately indicated he plans to take a more calibrated stance with regard to the matter, a key point of tension as he now works to expand his coalition in a crowded race that includes Mayor Eric Adams and former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, both running as independents. 

The Democratic mayoral nominee said in a private meeting with business leaders earlier this week that he would “discourage” use of the phrase but still did not go so far as to condemn it himself, according to reports of the closed-door discussion on Tuesday.

Additional reporting contributed by JI senior congressional correspondent Marc Rod

Mainstream political and business leaders in New York City, including the organized Jewish community, will soon need to decide whether to coalesce against far-left presumed Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani — by rallying behind the candidacy of scandal-plagued Mayor Eric Adams despite his significant political baggage.

Adams, who is running as an independent in the race, appears to be the only alternative candidate capable of putting together a campaign rallying anti-socialists across the city to stop Mamdani. It won’t be easy, given Adams’ own low approval ratings and record of alleged corruption, but the makings of an anti-Mamdani coalition are there — at least on paper.

For Adams to win plurality support in a general election, it would require most Republicans to put partisanship aside and vote for Adams to stop the socialist, and hold onto most of the Black, Jewish voters and moderate Democratic voters who voted in large numbers for former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the primary. Adams benefits from the name recognition of incumbency, and the potential to receive support from outside centrist groups spending on his behalf.

Keeping a bipartisan coalition of that nature will be challenging, especially given the mayor’s own unpopular record. It would require a number of lucky breaks, from Cuomo opting not to run in the general election (he appears to be staying on the ballot without an active campaign) to Republicans effectively nudging their voters to back Adams when there’s a Republican already on the ballot. But if the campaign is less about Adams and more about stopping left-wing radicalism on crime, the economy and antisemitism, it’s not implausible to see a campaign coalescing around a “block socialism, vote Adams” type of message.

Here’s the political math: Adams would have to win over most New York City Republicans — President Donald Trump won 30% of the citywide vote in 2024 — while remaining competitive with Democrats and winning over independents who weren’t eligible to participate in the Democratic primary. 

An Emerson College poll conducted amid Mamdani’s surge in late May offers some empirical evidence that such a coalition has an outside shot at victory in a general election, with a broader, more-moderate electorate. The survey found that with Mamdani as the Democratic nominee, he leads with 35%, Republican Curtis Sliwa finishes with 16%, Adams holds 15% and independent Jim Walden tallied 6%. 

Put together the Sliwa, Walden and Adams votes, and you’ve got yourself a competitive race. 

There’s already a lot of rumbling that Trump administration officials, eager to see Sliwa off the ballot, are looking at offering him a job in the administration to help nudge GOP voters into the Adams column to stop Mamdani. But Sliwa has given every indication so far that he’s not dropping out, which would force Republican leaders to more subtly nudge GOP partisans towards Adams. 

The big red flag for anti-Mamdani moderates? Adams’ favorability rating in the same poll was a dismal 19%, with 69% viewing him unfavorably. That said, given the changed nature of the contest, the perception of Adams could change amid the shifting strategic environment. He’s already running a more energetic campaign than Cuomo did in the primary. (And it’s a safer bet to hope Adams’ numbers improve as an anti-Mamdani vehicle than betting on a total outsider with minimal name ID to play that role, as a few business leaders have suggested.)

There is some precedent for mainstream forces working to block a far-left or far-right candidate after an unexpected primary outcome. One of the most recent examples is socialist India Walton’s out-of-nowhere upset against Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown in a 2021 Democratic primary. Many analysts attributed her victory to a left-wing surge; it turned out to be a mirage of a low-turnout election before a broader array of voters really had a chance to scrutinize her record and background. Brown easily won the general election — as a write-in candidate.

There’s also former Sen. Joe Lieberman winning as an independent in 2006 after losing the Democratic primary, with Republicans signaling to their voters to back the senator over the also-ran GOP nominee on the ballot. And there’s the 1991 Louisiana governor’s election where scandal-plagued Democratic Gov. Edwin Edwards beat David Duke, whom Republican voters knowingly nominated. Edwards’ slogan? “Vote for the Crook. It’s Important.”

To be sure, any anti-Mamdani effort will be something of a long shot. Mamdani is now winning support from elected New York Democratic leaders all too willing to accommodate his radical record, and he generated strong turnout in the primary that underscores his natural charisma and strength as a politician. He’s got more starpower than many of the other aforementioned extreme nominees.

But if Jewish leaders believe Mamdani would pose a serious threat to Jewish life and safety in the city if elected, you’d expect they would make every effort to stop his candidacy — especially since there’s a chance, albeit a small one, that his momentum could be stunted as his record draws closer attention.