By: Tzirel Rosenblatt – Jewish Voice News

In a development sending tremors through Jewish communities and political observers nationwide, activist Linda Sarsour declared this week that Zohran Mamdani’s ascent to the New York mayoralty proves that hardline anti-Israel rhetoric is no longer a political liability but a “pathway to City Hall.” Speaking at a virtual event hosted by her organization, MPower Change, Sarsour proclaimed that Mamdani’s victory shows that a candidate who openly denounces Israel, embraces the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, and frames anti-Zionism as “moral courage” can not only survive but thrive electorally in America’s largest city.

Her remarks—reported on Saturday by World Israel News which has been closely tracking Mamdani’s political rise—represent one of the most explicit acknowledgments yet from within the progressive activist sphere that anti-Israel messaging is no longer viewed as fringe or politically risky within key segments of the New York electorate. Instead, she argues, it has become a galvanizing force.

During the online seminar titled “Zohran’s Victory and Implications for the Progressive Movement,” Sarsour told supporters that Mamdani’s win validates a fundamental shift in the city’s political ecosystem. “Being unequivocally in solidarity with the Palestinian people,” she said, “actually sends you to City Hall.”

According to the information provided in the World Israel News report, she argued that it is no longer necessary for candidates to moderate their rhetoric in order to appeal to mainstream voters. On the contrary, she said Mamdani’s campaign demonstrated that describing the situation in Gaza as “genocide,” endorsing the BDS campaign, and presenting anti-Zionist activism as “nonviolent resistance to apartheid” can help propel a candidate to victory.

“We have proof,” Sarsour said with triumph. “New Yorkers are ready for courage. They are ready for people who stand with the oppressed, even if it means challenging the powerful.”

Her tone—simultaneously celebratory and combative—reflected the broader message she delivered to her audience: Mamdani’s success should be treated not as an anomaly but as a blueprint.

Sarsour’s involvement in Mamdani’s political evolution is neither subtle nor incidental. As the World Israel News report recounted, the two have been closely linked for years. Mamdani, who built his political identity as a democratic socialist and fierce critic of Israel, has long been viewed as an ideological protégé of Sarsour, whose advocacy frequently blends Palestinian nationalism, intersectional rhetoric, and strident denunciations of Zionism.

Before the October 7, 2023 Hamas massacre, Sarsour was already known for incendiary remarks that placed her at odds with mainstream Jewish organizations. She told audiences that Muslims should never “humanize” Israelis, characterizing them wholesale as “oppressors.” The depth of her animus toward Israel ultimately contributed to her removal from leadership of the Women’s March, following widespread criticism of her praise for Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, an avowed antisemite.

Her reputation as a polarizing figure has hardly dimmed her influence in the activist left. Instead, her ideological clarity—combined with her ability to mobilize and inspire younger voters—has made her one of the most influential bridges between grassroots organizing and electoral politics.

The event organized by MPower Change brought together a broad coalition of left-wing groups, signaling a coordinated effort to amplify and replicate the Mamdani model. As World Israel News reported, among the speakers were Maurice Mitchell of the Working Families Party—a major force in progressive New York politics—and Geoff Simpson of Justice Democrats, the organization credited with helping launch the congressional careers of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other members of the so-called Squad.

Their presence underscored Sarsour’s primary thesis: Mamdani’s victory is not merely a local triumph but a harbinger of a national political realignment.

“This is the time to dream big,” Sarsour said. “To say, ‘Where are we going in 2026? How do we build on this momentum?’”

Her exhortation was explicit. Candidates across the country, she argued, should view Mamdani’s win as proof that forceful anti-Israel positions are not only defensible but potentially advantageous.

Much of Sarsour’s rhetoric rests on reframing traditional political narratives about Israel. According to the report at World Israel News, she emphasized that candidates should feel emboldened to describe Israel’s actions in Gaza as “genocide,” a term regarded by many experts as factually wrong and deeply inflammatory. She told supporters that framing Israel as an apartheid state engaging in “ethnic cleansing” resonates powerfully with younger voters steeped in social-justice language and activist ideology.

Where earlier generations of candidates might have feared being labeled extremist or alienating Jewish voters, Sarsour suggested that the electoral calculus has changed dramatically. “There will be enough people who will be inspired by my courage and my moral convictions,” she predicted. “Enough people that I, in fact, can win office in any part of the country.”

Her confidence reflects a growing belief within segments of the progressive movement that their worldview—once limited to activist circles—is now penetrating electoral politics at the highest municipal level.

The implications of Sarsour’s message, as analyzed in the World Israel News report, are far-reaching. The normalization of radical anti-Israel rhetoric within mainstream political campaigns represents a seismic departure from decades of bipartisan support for Israel. It also signals an intensifying tension between progressive activists and more centrist Democrats, many of whom fear that the elevation of hardline anti-Israel figures will alienate moderate voters and fracture traditional Democratic coalitions.

But the implications extend beyond domestic politics. The rebranding of anti-Zionism as a mass electoral strategy risks deepening social fissures, particularly as antisemitic incidents continue to rise across the country. If candidates across state and federal races adopt Mamdani-style messaging, Jewish communities could face mounting pressure, political isolation, and heightened vulnerability.

World Israel News has already documented numerous instances in which activists and candidates blur the line between political critique and wholesale demonization of Israeli civilians. Sarsour’s framing—presenting anti-Israel activism as a moral litmus test—amplifies such rhetoric and signals that candidates unwilling to adopt these positions may be cast as morally suspect.

Critics of Sarsour caution that her interpretation of Mamdani’s win is overly reductive. While his anti-Israel positions may have solidified certain activist constituencies, his victory also reflects demographic changes, low-turnout local election dynamics, and the strategic muscle of organizations like the Working Families Party. Whether similar outcomes can be reproduced in national races—or even statewide contests—remains an unresolved question.

Yet dismissing her analysis entirely would be a mistake. As the report at World Israel News pointed out, Mamdani’s mayoral victory was once unthinkable. His openly anti-Israel record, connections to BDS, and radical policy proposals—such as calling for the arrest of Israeli officials visiting the city—would have disqualified him in past eras. The fact that he prevailed suggests a profound recalibration within New York politics.

Sarsour’s argument rests on extrapolating that recalibration to the national stage.

In her closing remarks, Sarsour issued what amounted to a call to arms for her supporters. The next election cycle, she said, must be defined by boldness. Candidates should feel free—not fearful—to embrace the most severe critiques of Israel and the most sweeping denunciations of Zionism.

“And now,” she told the webinar’s participants, “it’s time to say: ‘Where are we going in 2026?’”

Her message was unmistakable: Mamdani’s triumph was not an endpoint but an opening salvo.

World Israel News reported that progressive organizations are already positioning themselves to recruit and groom candidates who mirror Mamdani’s ideological profile. These groups view anti-Israel activism not as a liability to manage but as a foundational pillar of their political identity.

Whether Sarsour’s prediction comes to pass remains uncertain. But what is clear, as meticulously chronicled by World Israel News, is that Mamdani’s victory has emboldened a movement increasingly willing to challenge long-standing political norms. If her analysis proves correct, New York’s mayoral race may soon be remembered not as an isolated political upset but as the opening act of a broader national transformation—one in which anti-Israel rhetoric becomes mainstream, strategically mobilized, and electorally rewarded.

For supporters of Zionism and for Jewish communities throughout the United States, the implications are sobering. And for the architects of the progressive movement, the path forward is clear: build on Mamdani’s success, weaponize anti-Israel messaging as a badge of political courage, and reshape the American political landscape in 2026 and beyond.

Whether the nation is prepared for such a transformation remains to be seen. But if Linda Sarsour’s words are any indication, the movement driving it is not only prepared—it is energized, coordinated, and ready for the next stage of its campaign.