I love magazines like The Atlantic. Ever since its editors first heard murmurings of a possible victory by Zohran Mamdani, the magazine has been running one anti-Mamdani article after another, with titles and claims like these:

• “The Magic Realism of Zohran Mamdani”
• “Why Won’t Zohran Mamdani Denounce a Dangerous Slogan?”
• “The 33-year-old Democratic nominee for New York City mayor is an avowed socialist from a privileged background, has defended inflammatory rhetoric such as ‘Globalize the intifada,’ and has a back catalog of hyper-woke social-media posts that would be electoral poison in any remotely competitive district.”
• “New York Is Not a Democracy: Too few voters are choosing the next mayor.”
• “Mamdani’s desire to reduce grocery prices for New Yorkers is undercut most glaringly by the labor policies that he champions.”
• “Zohran Mamdani Reveals the Absurdity of Affirmative Action”

But now, having lapped this one field of propaganda, the magazine has decided to launch itself on a different course. On today’s website, I read a lengthy attack on the Democratic Socialists of America, the organization from which Mamdani hails. Pining for the days of Michael Harrington—when the organization had 7% of the membership it has today—the magazine declares that the problem with DSA is that it is not more like Mamdani, who knows how to build bridges, turn windy ideology into plain talk, and win elections.

Until yesterday, the problem with Zohran Mamdani was that he was too much like DSA. Today, the problem with DSA is that it is not enough like Zohran Mamdani.