The rise of Zohran Mamdani reads less like a spontaneous grassroots surge and more like a planned campaign built by a tight network of Muslim and socialist organizations, powerful foundations, and influential clerics. From a 2017 sidewalk photo with Linda Sarsour to steady backing from MPower and Emgage, the story shows how coordinated funding, voter mobilization and faith-based endorsements propelled a young progressive into citywide politics. This piece examines that network, the money backing it, and the controversial religious figures who lent it legitimacy.
In 2017 a photo of Linda Sarsour posed with campaign volunteers became an early marker in a long political project that intersected with Zohran Mamdani’s path. That image was more than a snapshot; it marked an entrée into a political ecosystem that would engineer a rapid rise for a new generation of progressive leaders. Republican critics argue that what looks like momentum is often the product of organized strategy and outside money.
Investigations show a dense web of about 110 groups and dozens of Democratic affiliates working in concert around Mamdani, with two hubs standing out: MPower and Emgage. Those organizations function as both mobilizers and amplifiers, stitching together local groups, unions and voter outreach efforts. The result is a modern campaign machine that blends community organizing with targeted political operations.
Open Society philanthropies have provided significant funding tied to this ecosystem, with public filings showing nearly $2.5 million in grants to MPower and Emgage. A spokesperson for Open Society Foundations said, “We fund a range of civil society organizations that work to deepen civic engagement through peaceful democratic participation, counter discrimination including against Muslim Americans and advance human rights.” They also emphasized that those grants predate the mayoral contest and that the foundation is nonpartisan.
The coalition around Mamdani includes Muslim civic groups, ethnic associations and progressive organizations working at city and state levels, and they have coordinated endorsements, fundraising, canvassing and social media campaigns. Names like CAIR Action, Muslim Action Coalition, Yemeni American Merchants Associations Inc., Bangladeshi American Advocacy Group and Desis Rising Up and Moving appear among the backers. Collectively these groups report annual revenues in the millions and they have been a steady presence on the campaign trail.
That financial and organizational muscle translates into concrete campaign work: voter outreach, targeted digital messaging and ground canvassing that boosts name recognition. Emgage’s Defend and Advance program has put resources behind candidates across states, and MPower has focused on building Muslim political power in urban areas. For Republican observers, the coordination looks like a leftward push that leverages religious networks to influence secular elections.
Some endorsed figures have made headlines for divisive rhetoric, such as Dearborn Mayor Abdullah Hammoud, who said, “I want you to know as mayor, you are not welcome here,” in an exchange with a Christian pastor. Critics point to such statements as evidence that elements in this coalition embrace confrontational politics and identity-first messaging rather than broad civic outreach. Those exchanges feed concerns about whether these networks prioritize pluralism or political dominance.
There are also older, murkier financial threads. Donations from vehicles like Sterling Charitable Gift Fund have drawn scrutiny because of historical inquiries into networks tied to funding in Islamist circles. While federal prosecutors did not file criminal charges in past probes, the association raises questions for those wary of opaque philanthropic pipelines feeding political operations.
Over nearly a decade, Linda Sarsour and allied organizers built a coherent infrastructure linking nonprofits, foundations and political clubs. Major foundations such as the Foundation to Promote Open Society, the Ford Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation and the Tides Foundation appear in the funding picture. That mix of deep-pocketed philanthropy and grassroots organizing is what critics call the architecture of an engineered rise.
“To the casual observer, Zohran Mamdani’s rise might appear meteoric – a story of grassroots energy and demographic change in America’s largest city,” said Dalia Al-Aqidi. She added, “The data, the money trail and the affiliations, from the Democratic Socialists of America to the Islamists, tells a different story.” Those lines capture the core contention: visible momentum hiding a coordinated model.
Mamdani’s early organizing fits the pattern. As a college student he cofounded a Students for Justice in Palestine chapter and later joined the Muslim Democratic Club of New York, where the group urged volunteers with the call, “Help build Muslim power across the city with us!” That pathway led to board roles, endorsements and access to voter lists and donor networks that translate into political clout.
https://x.com/muslim_votes/status/1980661064468705768
Religious endorsements have been central to that clout, with Mamdani forging ties to clerics whose records are controversial. He described Imam Siraj Wahhaj as “one of the nation’s foremost Muslim leaders and a pillar of the Bed-Stuy community” after meeting him, and he accepted a donation from the imam. Critics point to Wahhaj’s past statements and associations as reasons to question the judgment of candidates who seek his blessing.
Wahhaj’s history includes serving as a character witness for Omar Abdel-Rahman, the “Blind Sheikh,” and a string of provocative sermons. He has said, “You don’t get in politics because it’s the American thing to do,” and has used phrases denouncing the U.S. as “controlled by Shaitan,” urged Muslims not to befriend “non-believers,” and condemned homosexuality as “a disease of this society.” Those words remain a focal point for opponents who warn against normalizing such figures into mainstream campaigns.
Other imams connected to Mamdani’s orbit, like Talib Abdur-Rashid and Khalid Latif, have histories that draw scrutiny as well, though supporters call them community leaders. Latif endorsed Mamdani, calling him “a bearer of compassion in a time where it is far too rare.” For political organizers, these clerics are not liabilities but trusted gatekeepers to growing voter blocs in the city.
Mamdani’s public defenses and his allies’ responses have been direct when critics push back. After a photo with Wahhaj drew criticism, Mamdani tweeted, “Pleasure to meet Imam Siraj Wahhaj, one of the nation’s foremost Muslim leaders.” Linda Sarsour shared a selfie and wrote, “May Allah continue to bless and protect you.” Emgage’s Wa’el Alzayat responded to scrutiny with the line, “We are in this for the long haul.”
Dalia Al-Aqidi put the strategy bluntly: “For over a decade, Linda Sarsour and her network of allies have built the Mamdani machine piece by piece: the institutions, the donors, the narratives and now, the candidate. There was no way they were going to throw him under the bus for one photo with one imam whom they happen to love,” she said. “Mamdani is the fresh face of a radical coalition, and I hope New Yorkers will reject him. Win or lose, one fact remains undeniable. His rise was not spontaneous. It was engineered and the machinery behind it is only getting stronger.”
Al-Aqidi said; “I hope New Yorkers will shut the Mamdani machine down.”
