Muslim candidates are running for office in America in growing numbers, particularly at the local and municipal level. That reality should not surprise anyone. What should concern voters is how often these campaigns align with an ideology that rejects the separation of religion and government and treats political power as a moral obligation rather than a public trust.

The Mamdani Effect

Americans censor themselves every day. Social punishment teaches people to stay quiet when something feels wrong. A country that cannot speak plainly loses the ability to govern itself. No one wants to risk the label of Islamophobic. Whatever.

To keep the discussion polite and socially acceptable, activists rebrand the ideology. They call it political Islam. The phrase sounds harmless. That is the intent. With Islam, political Islam, there is no separation of church and state.

Some, over at At The Hill, are calling it The Mamdani Effect. Isn’t that cute.

A growing number of Muslim candidates are seeking office following Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani’s stunning success in New York City last month.

Last week, an Arab and Muslim American co-founder of the “Uncommitted” movement, which urged Democrats to cast 2024 protest votes over the Israel-Hamas war, launched a bid for state office in Michigan. And this week, the first Muslim woman to win elected office in North Carolina jumped into the race to represent her state in Congress. They join Abdul El-Sayed, who has been vying for Michigan’s open Senate seat, as the most high-profile Muslim candidates running next year.

Their bids come after Mamdani, a democratic socialist, was elected the first Muslim mayor of New York City in November. That same night, Virginia voted to make progressive lieutenant governor candidate Ghazala Hashmi the first Muslim woman elected to statewide office.

“We have the Mamdani effect, which now is exciting a lot more folks to think about running for office,” said Basim Elkara, executive director of the Center for American Islamic Relations Government Affairs (CAIR) Action,which aims to engage the American Muslim community in elections up and down the ballot.

“Because here’s someone who is not shy of his identity, and also has become one of the most popular elected officials in the country,” Elkara said, adding that “more Muslims that are interested in running for office realize that their identity is not a liability.” – The Hill

Political Islam

Political Islam does not coexist with a secular system. It seeks control over it. It elevates belief above law and treats governance as obligation rather than consent. Wherever it gains influence, it pushes power in one direction and brands dissent as immoral.

The First Amendment drew a clear boundary between faith and governing authority. Political Islam challenges that boundary directly. When persuasion fails, its advocates turn to elections to push religious authority into spaces the Constitution was designed to keep neutral.

America’s political system allows this strategy to work. Low-turnout elections, fragmented media, and a culture that punishes offense give organized movements room to advance without serious resistance. This tactic isn’t new, but it is accelerating. Critics raised warnings months ago. Institutions ignored them. Now the pattern is impossible to miss.

Ridvan Aydemir, an ex-Muslim who escaped from the “cult of Islam” and became a Christian, says we must prioritize stopping the influx of Muslims to the West, and we should prioritize deporting explicitly political Islamist organizations and people.

I agree.@ApostateProphet pic.twitter.com/1yC3I4vPD1

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) July 27, 2025

From Australia to Michigan, the Pattern Is the Same

Australia already shows where unlimited tolerance leads.

This has nothing to do with small towns. Even massive cities like New York function on tiny turnouts and low-information races. When most people tune out, organized activists take over.

Michigan already shows what happens when it works.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib governs Michigan’s 12th Congressional District, centered around Detroit and Dearborn. Her rise did not reflect broad persuasion or national consensus. It reflected ideological capture inside a concentrated district where turnout is predictable, opposition is punished, and primaries decide everything.

Rashida Tlaib shows how this ideology embeds itself where resistance is already neutralized. Zohran Mamdani shows how it gets sold to the rest of the country.

If Michigan is the Training Ground. New York is the Showroom.

Tlaib governs from a protected district where opposition barely registers. Mamdani operates in full view, smiling, polished, and carefully packaged. He takes the same ideological posture and strips away the sharp edges. And he replaces confrontation with reassurance. Mamdani trades blunt rhetoric for moral confidence.

The New York City mayor-elect proved you no longer need to intimidate voters to win. You just need to exhaust them. Smile, speak softly about justice and progress. Let institutions do the dirty work of silencing critics on your behalf. Anyone who objects is treated as morally defective, not politically opposed.

What works quietly in Michigan gets refined in New York. What survives scrutiny in a safe district gets normalized on a national stage. By the time it spreads, people no longer recognize it as ideological at all. It just feels inevitable.

That is the Danger Mamdani Represents.

And more copycat candidates are about to flood the ballot boxes.

More than three dozen of 76 Muslim candidates tracked by CAIR and CAIR Action saw victories across the country during last month’s off-year elections. The group reported a staggering 97 percent of NYC Muslim voters backed Mamdani, and 95 percent in Virginia backed Hashmi. Mamdani’s win has already prompted a surge of young people and progressives interested in running for office, according to the political organization Run for Something.

“I think next year is a big test for the American Muslim community, and I think … both parties will be paying attention,” Elkara said, pointing to both up-and-coming candidates and the potential for boosted voter turnout from the demographic. – The Hill

After Mamdani, the question stopped being whether this model could win. It became how fast it could be scaled. Movements that smell success do not wait for permission. They measure, mobilize, and move. At that point, outcomes stop being accidental and start being predictable.

What Mamdani made acceptable will not stay contained. Once ideology hides behind identity and criticism gets punished as bigotry, American self-government starts to fail. Elections still happen, but consent disappears. By the time voters realize what they’ve lost, objecting will already be off-limits.

Sidenote: Need a last minute Christmas gift? Might I suggest Douglas Murray’s book The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam. His book warned that Europe unraveled through silence and accommodation. The pattern is starting to look familiar here.

Feature Image: Generated and created in Canva Pro