Supporting Israel and supporting Netanyahu are not the same thing
A new AP/NORC survey has found that New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani holds higher favorability among Jewish American voters than Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — a finding that would have seemed improbable not long ago. The result arrives amid years of fracturing assumptions about Jewish American political identity, as communities increasingly distinguish between solidarity with Israel as a people and endorsement of its current leadership. It is less a story about one mayor or one prime minister than about a generation of voters quietly renegotiating what loyalty, identity, and political allegiance mean in a complicated world.
- A poll that would have been unthinkable a decade ago now shows an American city mayor outranking Israel's prime minister in favorability among Jewish American voters.
- Years of conflict in Gaza and deepening divisions within Jewish American communities have eroded the once-reliable assumption that support for Israel meant support for Netanyahu.
- Even Curtis Sliwa — Mamdani's own defeated opponent — found the data significant enough to publicly call for Netanyahu's resignation, signaling how far the conversation has shifted.
- Younger Jewish voters in particular are driving a willingness to criticize Israeli government policy in ways that previous generations largely avoided.
- The poll lands not as a verdict on Mamdani himself, but as a mirror held up to a community redefining what it expects from leaders both at home and abroad.
A joint survey by the Associated Press and the National Opinion Research Center has surfaced a striking finding: New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani now registers higher favorability among Jewish American voters than Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The result captures a moment of genuine shift in how a historically significant American demographic is weighing questions of identity, leadership, and where political loyalty ultimately belongs.
Netanyahu has led Israel through years of conflict and controversy, and the war in Gaza has forced difficult conversations within Jewish American communities about what support for Israel truly means. Mamdani, meanwhile, has emerged as a consequential figure in a city that holds one of the largest Jewish populations outside Israel itself. The contrast between the two men — separated by geography, context, and political tradition — has become, for many voters, a kind of referendum on competing visions of leadership.
Curtis Sliwa, who ran against Mamdani in the mayoral race and lost, responded to the poll by calling for Netanyahu to step down. The statement matters less for Sliwa's political standing than for what it reveals: even an opponent of Mamdani's found the data impossible to ignore.
What the survey ultimately reflects is a fracturing of long-held assumptions. Jewish American voters have historically been understood as closely aligned with Israeli leadership, but that framework has grown more complicated — particularly among younger voters who have shown increasing comfort with dissent and with separating support for Israel as a nation from endorsement of its current government. Whether this poll marks a durable realignment or a moment of acute frustration with Netanyahu's tenure remains an open question, but the old certainties have clearly shifted.
A new survey conducted jointly by the Associated Press and the National Opinion Research Center has found something that would have seemed unlikely just years ago: New York City's mayor, Zohran Mamdani, now registers higher favorability among Jewish American voters than Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel. The poll captures a moment of significant shift in how a key American demographic views two political leaders separated by geography but increasingly connected in the minds of voters weighing questions of identity, allegiance, and domestic versus international priorities.
The finding arrives at a moment of particular tension. Netanyahu has led Israel through years of conflict and controversy, including the recent war in Gaza that has fractured traditional coalitions and forced difficult conversations within Jewish American communities about what support for Israel means and where loyalty ultimately lies. Mamdani, by contrast, has emerged as a figure who commands attention in New York politics—a city with one of the largest Jewish populations in the United States outside of Israel itself.
Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate who ran against Mamdani in the mayoral race and lost, responded to the poll's release with a blunt statement: it was time for Netanyahu to step down. The comment is notable not because Sliwa is a major political figure—he is not—but because it signals how far the conversation has moved. Even a political opponent of Mamdani's, someone who stood against him in a hard-fought election, found the polling data significant enough to weigh in on Israeli leadership.
What the survey reveals is a fracturing of assumptions that have long held in American politics. Jewish American voters have historically been understood as a bloc with strong ties to Israeli leadership and policy. That framework has not disappeared, but it has become more complicated. The emergence of Mamdani as a figure with higher favorability than Netanyahu suggests that Jewish Americans are increasingly willing to evaluate leaders—whether Israeli or American—on their own terms, without the automatic deference that once characterized the relationship.
The poll does not exist in isolation. It reflects years of debate within Jewish American communities about the direction of Israeli policy, the human cost of conflict, and what it means to be both American and Jewish in a moment when those identities can pull in different directions. Younger Jewish voters, in particular, have shown willingness to criticize Israeli government actions in ways that would have been unthinkable a generation ago. Mamdani's higher favorability rating may be less a statement about him specifically and more a statement about the voters themselves—their changing priorities, their comfort with dissent, their sense that supporting Israel and supporting its current prime minister are not the same thing.
The question now is whether this poll captures a durable shift or a moment of particular frustration with Netanyahu's tenure. Jewish American political preferences have moved before and may move again. But the fact that a sitting Israeli prime minister now trails an American city mayor in favorability among Jewish voters suggests that the old certainties are gone, and the conversation about what Jewish Americans want from their leaders—both here and abroad—is far from settled.
Notable Quotes
It's time for Bibi to go— Curtis Sliwa, Republican mayoral candidate
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
What does it mean that Mamdani outpaces Netanyahu among Jewish Americans? Is this about Mamdani being popular, or Netanyahu being unpopular?
It's probably both, but the Netanyahu piece is heavier. The poll captures a moment when a lot of Jewish voters have real doubts about his leadership—doubts they're willing to express publicly now in ways they might not have before.
So this is about Gaza? About the recent war?
That's part of it, yes. But it's also about something deeper—the idea that supporting Israel and supporting Netanyahu are not the same thing. That distinction has become acceptable to voice.
Why does Curtis Sliwa's reaction matter? He lost to Mamdani.
Because even a political opponent felt the poll was significant enough to comment on Israeli leadership. It shows how far the conversation has moved. This isn't fringe anymore.
Are we seeing a permanent shift in Jewish American politics, or is this temporary frustration?
That's the real question. Polls capture moments. Whether this becomes durable depends on what happens next—in Israel, in Gaza, in American politics. But the willingness to express these doubts publicly? That feels like it's here to stay.
What does Mamdani represent to these voters?
Partly, he's just a local figure they can evaluate on his own merits. But he also represents something else—the idea that you can be thoughtful about Israel without being bound by traditional expectations. He's not running on Israel policy. He's running on New York. And that matters.