Will the Trump-Mamdani Meeting Reveal a Trajectory for NYC? Panelists Discuss

President Trump will meet with NYC Mayor Alex Zoram Amdani today. Joining us to discuss is Maline Somerville, Democratic strategist, speech writer and attorney. And we have Gerard Viti, political strategist and attorney specializing in international law. Uh so good afternoon to you both. Thank you for joining us today. Um if I may, Maline, I'll start with you today. Uh just to start off here, maybe you can speak to the sign significance of this meeting. So, I think this meeting is incredibly significant. Um, first of all, it's traditional for the mayor of the largest city in the United States of America to go meet with the president. Um, but politically, I think that this meeting is significant uh because it speaks it it bodess well for mom Donnie either way. He wins either way. And what I mean by that is if he goes in to this meeting and comes out fighting saying that, you know, they couldn't get along no matter what they did and he's going to keep fighting for New Yorkers, he wins, right? Because the Democrats want that. If he comes out and he says, um, you know, I I have been able to find common ground with the president, then he legitimizes the Democratic Socialist Party because he right now it's looked at as, you know, a bunch of young kids who don't know what they're doing. Um, you know, they're they're struggling to to make it make their belief system apply to the biggest city in the country. Um, but I think if he goes in there and and is is sensible and reasonable, which I believe that he will be, um, and they can actually work together to try to get something done, I think that he ends up legitimizing his entire party. So, it's a win for him either way. >> Okay. Gerard uh Meline says it's a win for Mdani either way at the end of this meeting. Can you talk to us about how you view this meeting, its significance? >> This is a meeting between the man who changed the face of the Republican party and the man who's changing the face of the Democratic party. So, in a way, this is the present of the Republican party versus the future of where the Democrats go from here. And both have revitalized and brought new voters into the fold and excited voters to propel them into office. What's really significant today is that there is such a clash of ideologies. And at the end of the day, the question is whether Zoran Mamani can actually govern effectively and not just use slogans and speeches to propel himself to power. And that is what this meeting will show. Whether Mamani is serious as an elected official, whether he can transition from a candidate to an actual mayor and whether he can govern. And Donald Trump is someone who has been very effective in the last 150 days, 200 days of office of setting the agenda for the for for the nation. and whether Mamani can actually find common ground or not. There is so much opposition built into Mam Dani even before he assumes the office that we need to see where to go from here and today's meeting will be telling. >> So Maline uh earlier you talked about uh some of the objectives perhaps that Mamani um could have in mind going into this meeting. Uh can you go a bit deeper into that? uh can you list us a few more goals uh for President Trump and Mandani uh going into this meeting? >> Yeah, so it's very interesting because I think President Trump um for lack of a better term game recognizes game, right? So I think what he will see is that uh Zoramdani invented sort of this uh affordability, not that he invented the word, but he sort of coined it for the the problem of our time, right? the political problem of our time. And I think he's gonna he's obviously recognized that as as a major thing because I watched him dodge using that word during his McDonald's speech the other day. He was like, you know, whatever whatever the cost of living problem that we have is. Um, and he's he's used it in different contexts to let people know it bugs him, right? But I think game recognizes game. So when you get in that room together and you realize, hey, this is what's actually bothering people, it ends up being a win for both of them if they can figure out something that makes it better, right? And that actually is what our pol what what politics should be is we have the same goal. We just have different ideas of what's going to work in order to get there. And I don't think that Trump is an ideal log, right? I don't think that he's tied to any piece from the Republican party, right? He's he's taken 10% of Intel shares um you know, proceeds that come in, right? He doesn't care whether it's a socialist thing or not. He doesn't care what the label is that you put on it. He'll find a different label just like Zora Donnie found a label. They know how to communicate with people and and I think that they will know how to put um the the the for lack of a better word uh complications I guess aside and work together on what actually matters. >> So Gerard, can you respond to that? Uh can you talk about President Trump's goals into this meeting in addition to Mani's? I think President Trump's goals in addition to Madan's president goals, President Trump's goals are to ensure that his policies are implemented. And by that I mean he has a focus on law and order and on the economy. He wants to improve both. He wants to make sure that immigration crackdowns are followed through in New York City. He wants to be sure that New York City is a safer place to live. And that means enforcing the laws, not substituting social workers for police officers. I think Donald Trump will see a push to regulate taxes, to make them lower, to make regulations less burdensome on businesses, which is the opposite of what Mani wants to do. So going into this, I think they have vastly different visions of how to achieve a better New York. Where they may find common ground is ironically perhaps with real estate development. I think both men see that there is a need for additional affordable housing units. and how you get there might very well be a benefit of of incentivizing companies to build and going and eliminating a lot of the regulations that have been a red tape. But at a very basic level, the difference between these two men is staggering. One sees a free market economy as the way forward and improving affordability and the ability of people to live in New York. The other sees a socialized system where you tax the rich and give benefits to everyone that's simply not sustainable and has been historically shown to do damage to cities and economies. Both you and Gerard have raised this issue of common ground numerous times now. So I want to follow up on that. What is the level of cooperation do you expect to see from the two? How much common ground really do they have Maline? >> Yeah. So I I think they have a tremendous amount actually of common ground. You know we talked about it in terms of their ability to communicate. Um, we talked about it in terms of uh being able to be in tune with what they know the American people want and that it it is it serves both of their interests to, for example, um, make housing more affordable and easier to access. I I agree with most everything Gerard just said. Um, I think that the the pro the potential problem area here, right, is that Trump likes for people to submit to him. He likes to be the big dog in the room, which is why appealing to his ego works because if you if you are submissive to him, he likes that. And Manny is not a submissive kind of guy. I think he's I think he's very respectful in a way that anybody should be. Um but when it comes to Mr. President, you're this, Mr. President, you're so great in the way that we've seen foreign dignitaries do, right? And and Trump has reciprocated by saying, you know, we may not agree on things, but but I'm going to take great care of you. Um, I don't know if we'll necessarily see that here because even though they have a tremendous amount of common ground in terms of um their policy goals, I think that in practice if people don't submit in terms of their their ego to President Trump, it complicates things quite a bit. >> Okay. So, Gerard, if the situation calls for some form of negotiation by the two parties, and I suspect probably there may be, uh, what leverage does each side have? What cards does Trump have to play and what cards does Mammodani have? The biggest leverage that Trump has is that he is the person who can control whether or not there is increased federal enforcement of laws in New York City, whether or not the National Guard is deployed to city streets, whether money that's been appropriated by Congress is withheld or suspended from infrastructure projects, be it building tunnels or subway lines or or uh anything having to do with with universities in New York City, including state and city finance universities. So Trump really has a lot of leverage coming into this. Maldani on the other hand has populist rhetoric. He has the the way about him that is motivating and getting younger voters to the polls and that's really making a significant change in the voting demographic in New York City. So on the one hand, Trump has real means to enforce his will. But Bamdani has the power of the the the the populist the populist voice that could really resonate well and change voters more into the direction of democratic socialists and to the left that would really harm Trump's ability to carry out his policies on a national level if Ramani becomes a spokesperson for the face of the resistance uh in all 50 states going forward. So each has a role here. But I think Trump does have more levels to levers to pull when it comes to actually implementing change in New York City if he so chooses. I think you're totally right about that. Um, and and I think that that that's a thing that people are missing. And the other thing that people are missing is that it's still a win for Mom Donnie if he comes out and and shakes hands with President Trump because again, it will legitimize the notion of the Democratic Socialist Party being a legitimate party in the United States. >> Okay, Madam, maybe you can continue uh this idea. If we're talking about negotiations, um, how do you think the conversation will go when they touch on the topics of affordability, immigration enforcement, and sanctuary city policies? >> So, I think they will go differently for different subjects that you just brought up. When it comes to affordability, um, I know I had mentioned that previously. I think that it's in their it's in both of their best interests to be pro business because people already think that mom Donnie is not. So, it will be in his best interest and in New York's best interest to work with Trump. I think uh Gerard's suggestion about housing was spoton. I think that that is is again common ground that they can find there. However, when it comes to safety, right, these are the things that these are the thing the reasons why mom Donnie ran in the first place, right, which is we don't think public safety is the way that it's structured, the way that our our public safety system is structured in New York is the right way to do it. He wants a a fundamental overhaul of it, right? the same thing with um with the National Guard being deployed or with immigration. He wants a straight up 180 360 of everything. And he's not going to relent on those things. I think probably in Montzani's head like as as a person who has integrity but ran on specific things, right? If he wants to come out a winner in this, all he has to do is maintain his integrity, right? Because you only the the public is only going to hold you to what you said that you were going to maintain. Um and you can always surprise them, but you can't lose if that's what you do. So if he goes in and says, "I'm not relenting on the National Guard, not relenting on changing how we police things, but if you want if you want to figure out uh what manners to go about in terms of uh creating affordability in the city, I'm all ears because it doesn't cost me anything. So I think it he's going to have to make those those kinds of decisions." >> Okay, Gerard. Uh similar question to you. How how do you think this meeting could impact New York New York City's future? I think this impact will show whether or not the next four years for New York City will be bogged down in lawsuits and lawfare by either the Republicans against the Democrat Man Bandani or the Democrats against uh President Trump trying to bring in a national guard or do other things. I think whether this meeting goes well and there's a productive way to move forward on common ground like the economy, like housing, like affordability, or it will become bogged down in rhetoric and legal action about policing and the and law and order and national security. That's what really we need to watch for because there can be cooperation. There even can be animous, but so long as we don't get bogged down in the political style of lawsuits that will bog the city down, there will be progress. So, we really need to look for a sense of goodwill between these two men. Both are from Queens, both love New York, both have a vision for New York that's for the better, completely different in many respects, but if they can find a common ground to move forward together, we're going to see progress over the next four years. If, on the other hand, there's no personal understanding between the two, we'll see four years of struggle, of lawsuits, and of indecision at the state and federal level about what works best. >> Okay, we got to wrap up this conversation. uh ask each of you one more question. Uh Maline, what do you make of the House and we played this uh package this report earlier. What do you make of the House passing a resolution to denounce socialism right before Mamani's meeting with Trump? Well, um I I think that your choice to play uh the congresswoman from Venezuela's uh piece there was very interesting because um it sort of allows the Democrats to still touch on the problem of um bombing the the ships that were in the Caribbean waters um try in my view trying to ignite an armed conflict with Venezuela. Um but so I think I think part of it was political, right, in touching on that specific issue and and I think it's very interesting as an overall um because obviously we want to make sure that we as as a whole, right? And they had almost total consensus. We all agree we're not going to be a socialist country. We all agree that even though the Democratic party supports this democratic socialist, we are not going to be a socialist country. This is a variation of that. It's not the same thing. So, I actually think it's incredibly helpful because it helps people delineate. It helps the American public delineate in their minds, right? What is actually happening here? I think this was a great move for the Democrats specifically so that they could say this is that's not what we're endorsing here. I think it's it's really smart. >> Okay, Gerard, final final thoughts. >> More people have suffered under socialism and died in the pursuit of communism than any other ideology. It is inherently dangerous to humanity. It's a good thing that the House condemned it. This is not America. This is not what we want. And just like we've seen radicalization and extremism on the right. We have to be wary of radicalization on the left that is pushing for these socialist ideas for that is pushing for radicalism in a way that is contrary to our democratic principles. So it's a good thing that the city this the Congress did this and we have to be wary and mindful of what happens in New York City and anywhere else. We want the best for this country but we don't want to follow in the footsteps of failed nations. >> Okay. Okay. Well, good conversation today. Thank you both. Maline Gerard, pleasure. >> Great questions. Thank you.