Can a single fact move a locked-in view?
New York's reaction to Zohran Mamdani's first 100 days as mayor has been loud, tribal, and mostly talking past itself. We wanted to test something simple: can a single, specific fact from the other side actually move someone's view — or does polarization hold, no matter what?
What "the divide" looks like
In every borough we visited, people had firm opinions before we even finished the question. Conservatives expected a reckless agenda. Progressives expected a generational mayor. Moderates felt they weren't being talked to at all. We asked each person to rate Mamdani on a 1–10 scale, listened to their one real concern, then shared one fact from the opposing side that matched that concern. Then we asked them to rate him again.
The method was designed to be uncomfortable on purpose — we didn't want to tell supporters only good things, or skeptics only bad things. We wanted to see what happened when someone's strongest feeling met the strongest counter-evidence.
Three research components
Written field-note format with selfies, across Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, The Bronx, and Staten Island.
Full audio transcripts capturing longer, more conversational exchanges with respondents who had strong initial priors.
Dylan's Brooklyn video interview with a moderate supporter, captured on camera and fully transcribed.
Three consecutive periods at Avenues — 25 students and teachers each — presenting findings and holding a live debate.
How the method worked
Before score (1–10)
"Now that Mamdani has been mayor for about 100 days, how would you rate your overall impression?" The exact number becomes the anchor.
Listen for the real concern
What's one thing you've liked or disliked? What's your biggest concern? Their answer determined which talking points we used next — we didn't read a script, we tailored to their actual stance.
Share one opposing perspective
Skeptics (scored 1–4) heard about real accomplishments. Supporters (scored 7–10) heard about real obstacles. Middle scorers (5–6) got whichever matched their specific concern.
After score (1–10)
Same scale. Any movement — up or down — is the measurement. We also asked whether their view was unchanged, slightly more nuanced, or noticeably shifted.
The two talking-point sets
For skeptics (scores 1–4) — real accomplishments
- Partnered with Gov. Hochul to expand free and low-cost childcare for NYC families — one of his first acts in office.
- "Pothole blitz" — a visible, practical street safety effort that drew support even from people who didn't vote for him.
- Took landlords to court over rental discrepancies — direct affordability action, not just rhetoric.
- $108 million sewer investment showing attention to basic city infrastructure.
For supporters (scores 7–10) — real obstacles
- Tax plan on the wealthy blocked — including by fellow Democrats like Gov. Hochul and City Council Speaker Menin.
- Own party isn't fully behind him; internal opposition is more organized than expected.
- Inherited a serious budget shortfall, now in open conflict with the City Council over service cuts.
- Fare-free buses — his signature campaign promise — still has no confirmed funding path.
Core hypothesis
If polarization is just information asymmetry, specific facts should move people. If it's tribal identity, nothing will. We found it's somewhere in between — and which one wins depends heavily on how specifically the fact matches the person's stated concern.
Convergence toward the middle
Across 60 scorable interviews, the pattern is clear: extreme scores pulled toward the center. Very few people flipped sides — but a striking number loosened their grip. The chart below shows every person as a line from their before score to their after score.
Convergence plot
Each horizontal line is one person. The left dot is their before score, the right dot is their after score. Blue lines moved toward the center (5.5); amber lines moved away; grey didn't move. Sorted by initial score.
The depolarization effect is most visible in people who started polarized (1–3 or 8–10). People who started at 5–6 couldn't meaningfully "move toward the middle" because they were already there — a floor effect, not a lack of impact. Read the chart as evidence about polarized respondents specifically.
Key finding
The biggest shifts happened when the talking point exactly matched the person's stated concern. A moderate who mentioned struggling with childcare and then heard the childcare expansion actually passed? They moved 2–3 points. A skeptic who'd seen street crews but didn't know why? Same. Specificity drove change far more than volume of information.
The two single facts that moved the most people
Menin blocking the tax plan
The single most effective obstacle fact. Progressives expected resistance from Albany, but not from the City Council Speaker — a Democrat. "Same team" was said repeatedly. Average shift: −2.3 points.
$108M sewer + pothole blitz
Conservatives and moderates who hadn't connected visible street work to the Mamdani administration gave real credit. Especially effective in The Bronx. Average shift: +2.4 points.
Average score change by borough
Absolute average shift per borough — where extremes met their counter-evidence hardest.
Average score change by age bracket
Younger respondents showed more movement — they held higher pre-scores and had sharper reactions to the obstacle facts.
Every interview, every score
Every scorable interview — written, audio, and video — with borough, leaning, before/after scores, and the main factor that drove (or didn't drive) the change. Filter to slice by any dimension.
| # | Age | Borough | Leaning | Before | After | Δ | Outcome | Main factor of change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 52 | Brooklyn | Conservative | 3 | 5 | +2 | Noticeably shifted | Pothole blitz + sewer investment |
| 2 | 31 | Queens | Moderate | 6 | 7 | +1 | Slightly more nuanced | Childcare expansion + landlord lawsuits |
| 3 | 43 | The Bronx | Liberal | 7 | 5 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Menin blocking tax plan |
| 4 | 49 | Manhattan | Conservative | 2 | 2 | 0 | Unchanged | N/A — unmoved |
| 5 | 23 | Brooklyn | Very liberal | 9 | 7 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Buses stalled + Menin blocking |
| 6 | 46 | Queens | Moderate | 5 | 7 | +2 | Noticeably shifted | Sewer investment + childcare |
| 7 | 50 | Staten Island | Liberal | 6 | 6 | 0 | Unchanged | Concerns already priced in |
| 8 | 42 | The Bronx | Moderate | 5 | 8 | +3 | Noticeably shifted | Childcare expansion directly relevant |
| 9 | 32 | Manhattan | Liberal | 8 | 6 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Menin blocking — deeper than Albany |
| 10 | 29 | Brooklyn | Very liberal | 9 | 6 | -3 | Noticeably shifted | Menin blocking + buses stalled |
| 11 | 34 | Queens | Moderate | 6 | 7 | +1 | Slightly more nuanced | Pothole blitz — saw it in neighborhood |
| 12 | 47 | The Bronx | Conservative | 3 | 6 | +3 | Noticeably shifted | Sewer investment in the Bronx |
| 13 | 33 | Manhattan | Liberal | 7 | 6 | -1 | Slightly more nuanced | Own party blocking — deeper than expected |
| 14 | 31 | Brooklyn | Moderate | 6 | 8 | +2 | Noticeably shifted | Childcare expansion directly relevant |
| 15 | 22 | Queens | Very liberal | 9 | 7 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Menin blocking — didn't know |
| 16 | 44 | Staten Island | Moderate | 5 | 5 | 0 | Unchanged | Not enough new info |
| 17 | 59 | Manhattan | Liberal | 7 | 5 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Pattern of party blocking progressives |
| 18 | 22 | Brooklyn | Very liberal | 10 | 6 | -4 | Noticeably shifted | Council opposition + buses no funding |
| 19 | 34 | Queens | Liberal | 7 | 7 | 0 | Unchanged | Setbacks already expected |
| 20 | 63 | The Bronx | Conservative | 3 | 6 | +3 | Noticeably shifted | Sewer investment + recognized pothole crews |
| 21 | 48 | Staten Island | Very conservative | 1 | 1 | 0 | Unchanged | N/A — unmoved |
| 22 | 54 | Brooklyn | Conservative | 2 | 4 | +2 | Noticeably shifted | Pothole blitz on his block |
| 23 | 39 | Queens | Liberal | 8 | 6 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Menin blocking wealth tax |
| 24 | 33 | The Bronx | Moderate | 5 | 7 | +2 | Noticeably shifted | Childcare expansion — has two kids |
| 25 | 53 | Staten Island | Conservative | 2 | 2 | 0 | Unchanged | N/A — unmoved |
| 26 | 62 | Manhattan | Liberal | 7 | 5 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Pattern of establishment blocking progressives |
| 27 | 57 | Brooklyn | Moderate | 6 | 7 | +1 | Slightly more nuanced | Pothole blitz on Flatbush + sewer investment |
| 28 | 32 | Queens | Liberal | 8 | 6 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Menin blocking — wasn't expecting it |
| 29 | 31 | The Bronx | Very liberal | 9 | 7 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Menin blocking + internal party organization |
| 30a | 60 | Staten Island | Liberal | 7 | 6 | -1 | Slightly more nuanced | Own party blocking — frustrating |
| 30b | 60 | Staten Island | Moderate | 6 | 5 | -1 | Slightly more nuanced | Sewer investment noted — budget concern |
| 30c | 60 | Staten Island | Conservative | 3 | 3 | 0 | Unchanged | N/A — unmoved |
| 31 | 33 | Manhattan | Liberal | 7 | 5 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Menin as home turf opposition |
| 32 | 52 | Brooklyn | Moderate | 5 | 7 | +2 | Noticeably shifted | Landlord lawsuits — personal relevance |
| 33 | 44 | Queens | Conservative | 3 | 5 | +2 | Noticeably shifted | Landlord lawsuits + sewer investment |
| 34a | 28 | The Bronx | Very liberal | 9 | 7 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Menin blocking tax — unexpected |
| 34b | 28 | The Bronx | Very liberal | 9 | 6 | -3 | Noticeably shifted | Buses no funding — main disappointment |
| 34c | 28 | The Bronx | Liberal | 8 | 6 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Council opposition more than expected |
| 35 | 41 | Manhattan | Moderate | 6 | 7 | +1 | Slightly more nuanced | Childcare + potholes — tangible results |
| 36 | 29 | Brooklyn | Liberal | 7 | 6 | -1 | Slightly more nuanced | Own party blocking — didn't know |
| 37 | 28 | Queens | Very liberal | 9 | 6 | -3 | Noticeably shifted | Menin blocking — genuinely shocking |
| 38 | 43 | The Bronx | Moderate | 5 | 8 | +3 | Noticeably shifted | Childcare + Bronx sewer flooding issue |
| 39 | 29 | Staten Island | Liberal | 7 | 5 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Council not behind him either |
| 40 | 45 | Manhattan | Conservative | 3 | 3 | 0 | Unchanged | Infrastructure doesn't offset direction |
| 41 | 42 | Brooklyn | Moderate | 6 | 7 | +1 | Slightly more nuanced | Landlord lawsuits + sewer investment |
| 42 | 40 | Queens | Liberal | 8 | 6 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Menin local — narrower path than expected |
| 43 | 26 | The Bronx | Very liberal | 10 | 6 | -4 | Noticeably shifted | Multiple fronts of internal opposition |
| 44 | 37 | Manhattan | Moderate | 6 | 7 | +1 | Slightly more nuanced | Childcare + pothole crews — tangible results |
| 45 | 29 | Brooklyn | Liberal | 7 | 6 | -1 | Slightly more nuanced | Buses no funding — main disappointment |
| 46 | 27 | Queens | Liberal | 7 | 5 | -2 | Noticeably shifted | Both big priorities stalled |
| 47 | 35 | Brooklyn | Moderate | 8 | 7 | -1 | Slightly more nuanced | Party not centered around him — credibility questions |
| 48 | 34 | The Bronx | Moderate | 3 | 4 | +1 | Slightly more nuanced | Pothole blitz + sewer infrastructure — didn't know |
| 49 | 20 | The Bronx | Moderate | 7 | 7 | 0 | Unchanged | Skepticism about delivery already baked in |
| 50a | 18 | The Bronx | Moderate | 7 | 7 | 0 | Unchanged | Wanting outcomes before crediting initiatives |
| 50b | 24 | The Bronx | Moderate | 7 | 7 | 0 | Unchanged | 100 days too early to rate higher |
| 51 | — | Manhattan | Centrist | 1 | 1 | 0 | Unchanged | N/A — unmoved (display floor applied) |
| 52 | 54 | Manhattan | Centrist | 2 | 2 | 0 | Unchanged | Infrastructure framed as 'minor achievements' |
| 53 | 54 | Staten Island | Liberal | 3 | 5 | +2 | Slightly more nuanced | Multiple concrete actions — especially sewer investment |
| 55 | 19 | Brooklyn | Conservative | 8 | 8 | 0 | Slightly more nuanced | Better view of tangible actions |
| 56 | 18 | Manhattan | Very conservative | 1 | 2 | +1 | Slightly more nuanced | Concrete wins softened absolute rejection |
46 faces, 46 conversations
46 written interviews, each with a selfie taken right after the conversation. Click any tile to read the full breakdown — age, borough, leaning, scores, their stance, what we shared, and what shifted. The borough shown on each photo is where that person lives. Group interviews #30 and #34 share one photo but each person has their own entry.
Longer-form, in their words
Ten longer, conversational interviews — one on video, nine on voice recording. These captured people who wanted to talk more deeply about Mamdani, and often revealed more about why they held their views, not just what they were.
Interviewed by Dylan — Brooklyn, Age 35, Moderate
"I feel like he's just entered the game. He's trying and he has a lot to do and a lot of experience to gain."
Voice recordings (9)
Age 34 — The Bronx — Moderate
"I was Republican, on their side. But now they're doing stuff that I don't like much. But Democrats still lie so I don't really know where I am."
"I didn't know about that. That's good. Why not, let's bump it to four."
Age 20 — The Bronx — Moderate
"He hasn't made that many changes compared to what he promised during the campaign. Like the fare-free buses — he said he was gonna make some buses free."
"I hope it'll be good at least for the city. I still rate him a seven."
Ages 18 & 24 — The Bronx — Neither
"Well a hundred days is still too early, so I'll go ahead and say seven. I think that's fair."
"Those sound like good things. But it's still a seven — we'll have to wait and see."
Manhattan — Centrist
"I haven't liked anything."
"I haven't seen anything that shows he's been doing a good job."
Age 54 — Manhattan — Centrist
"The biggest concern is the financial damage that he might do to the city."
"I don't think any of those things are really big achievements — they're all kind of minor."
Age 54 — Staten Island — Liberal
"He doesn't know what he doesn't know. All of these big dreams — it's just not the real world."
"Four and a half. Slightly more nuanced."
Brian — new to NYC — Manhattan
"Like I said, I just moved here. I've not been keeping up with New York politics at all."
"It sounds like he's doing good stuff. Hopefully the potholes and the cheap housing — I hope he does a good job. Optimistic."
Age 19 — Brooklyn — Conservative
"We need to get these streets cleaner — not some other end stuff."
"I had a small idea of some of them but I didn't know how great they were. It's giving me a better view on him."
Age 18 — Manhattan — Very conservative
"Who on earth is gonna pay for that? Taxes. And now why do we have to make taxes more expensive?"
"I'll give it a two instead of a zero. But I don't think he's doing awesome."
Bringing the research home
After the street interviews, we brought the research into the classroom — three consecutive periods with 25 students and teachers each, debating the four signature policies still in play: fare-free transit, rent freeze/housing, public grocery options, and the wealth tax. These were the future-looking fights — not the completed actions (like the pothole blitz or sewer investment) we'd discussed on the street.
of 75 students and teachers said the session changed how they felt about Mamdani — regardless of which direction they started from.
Vote results across all three periods
At the end of each session, we asked the same question we asked on the street: did any of this shift how you're thinking about Mamdani?
The four policies we covered
Fare-free transit
Rent freeze / housing
Public grocery options
Wealth tax
The four discussion questions we used each session
- Where does the funding come from? Fare-free buses, public grocery stores, and rent stabilization all cost the city something — lost fare revenue, operational costs, or forgone rent growth. Which policy's funding path is most realistic, and which feels like wishful thinking?
- Could any of these backfire on the people they're meant to help? A rent freeze might slow new housing supply. Public groceries could push out private options if they fail. Free buses could cut into MTA service quality. Where's the line between protection and unintended consequence?
- How much of this actually depends on Albany, the MTA, or the courts? NYC can't act alone on most of these. Which policy can Mamdani execute without outside cooperation — and which is most at the mercy of other institutions?
- If you had to pick one — free buses, rent freeze, or public grocery options — which does the most for everyday New Yorkers? And which would you drop?
What we observed
The pattern from the street held up in the classroom. Students who came in most certain — on either side — were the ones who moved the most. Almost no one flipped their position completely, but a striking number of students left saying some version of "I didn't realize his own party was blocking the wealth tax" or "I hadn't considered whether fare-free buses actually has a funding path."
The twelve students who reported unchanged views were split roughly evenly between firm supporters who felt the obstacles didn't disqualify the vision, and firm skeptics who felt the policy ideas weren't concrete enough to change their broader concerns. That same pattern appeared in the street data — both poles held when the fact didn't hit their specific concern.
Most important takeaway: the method works when you listen first. Every time a presenter tried to lead with the fact instead of the question, the room got defensive. When they waited for someone to name their concern first, the fact landed.