I think this gets the cause and effect reversed, though. For example, by this logic, the Bernie Sanders campaign demonstrated the same thing 9 years ago and opened the same door. But is that really what happened? The campaign itself was dismantled and the leftovers sold to the DNC. The hangers-on of campaign staff that are still relevant are basically liberal chauvinist hucksters. Some generally left formations grew, but this was largely after he failed, not succeeded. The campaign didn’t really open doors, the doors were already open but people hadn’t thought to enter them, they didn’t think they existed, the campaign said some of them did and then arguably stood in the way of them in lockstep with the bourgeois party. And so afterwards those who were inspired and then disaffected looked for and found those doors again.

They were already primed, they just had nobody trying to organize them, and the campaign didn’t really do that either. The growth was through self-organization where people out their hopes into whatever group seemed most aligned with them. It requires that vacuum, because no Sanders campaign was going to pick them up and organize.

So today we have another electoral campaign, and this time the person won. Same thing, they call themselves socialist and run on the Dem ticket, and play a bit fast and loose with what socialism is, trying to conflate it with minor social democratic reformism. What doors are now open that had previously been closed? There are few disaffected, as he actually won. He is going to actually govern and have to own the conditions that will likely continue to degrade. The DSA, particularly NYDSA, is too disorganized and unprincipled to be a force behind him to agitate sufficiently for what is needed. Perhaps their numbers will grow based on this win. But who is joining and what will this means in an org that has literally no education program or consistent actions? Will other orgs grow because of this? Probably not through positive vibes about a Mamdani win. Maybe through criticizing his eventual mistakes and betrayals, but how will that compare to those soured on the socialist that stabbed them in the back or didn’t do anything?

I just don’t see a tangible connection between “socialist brand won an election” and “things are looking up for organizing”. I can note that from personal experience a municipal socialist in office made an area basically poison for socialists for about two decades.