In a political season already brimming with spectacle, the November 21, 2025 White House meeting between President Donald Trump and New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani managed to surprise even the most jaded observers. What began as a routine political encounter quickly spiraled into a viral sensation, blending awkward cordiality, sharp ideological divides, a curious coffee-table book, and even a minor fashion controversy that set social media alight.
According to CBS News and The MES Times, Mamdani, the 34-year-old mayor-elect known for his outspoken progressive views, was greeted in the White House waiting room by an unexpected sight: a glossy book titled "UFC at the White House." The book, as Mamdani later recounted on The Adam Friedland Show, didn’t feature images of fighters but instead offered visualizations of how the UFC’s iconic octagon cage would look if set up on the South Lawn. The event, first teased by President Trump earlier in the year, is scheduled for June 14, 2026—timed to coincide with the nation’s 250th anniversary and Trump’s milestone 80th birthday. “I was unaware that the White House was preparing to host a UFC event,” Mamdani admitted, flipping through the book with a mixture of bemusement and curiosity. When asked if he’d attend, he replied with a chuckle, “No.”
But the real fireworks came not from the book, but the conversation that followed. Despite months of mutual criticism—Mamdani had labeled Trump a “fascist” and “despot,” while Trump had once referred to Mamdani as a “100% communist lunatic”—the meeting itself was unexpectedly polite. Reporters from Mirror US and NBC noted the cordial tone, with Trump even expressing unexpected optimism about Mamdani’s future. “We agree on a lot more than I would have thought,” Trump said, adding, “I think he could do a very good job.” He even told the press he’d “absolutely” feel comfortable living in New York City under Mamdani’s administration—a striking comment given their political differences and Trump’s own history as a New Yorker.
This surprising civility didn’t go unnoticed. The moment that truly caught the internet’s attention came when Mamdani, asked whether he still considered Trump a fascist, replied affirmatively. Trump, unfazed, responded, “That’s okay, you can say it. It’s easier than explaining, I don’t mind,” and tapped Mamdani’s arm with a laugh. The brief, almost playful exchange was captured on video and quickly went viral, with many observers marveling at the unexpected ease between the two men. As The MES Times put it, the clip “highlighted the contrast between public disagreement and in-person interactions.”
Comedian Seth Meyers couldn’t resist lampooning the encounter, devoting a segment of his November 24 show to the “flirtiest” moment he’d ever seen in presidential politics. “That is the flirtiest I’ve ever heard anyone say, ‘You can call me a fascist. You can call me a fascist, you can call me... I’ll be whatever you want me to be!’” Meyers joked, before quipping that Trump, surrounded by “joyless gargoyles like Stephen Miller and JD Vance,” was “smitten by someone who wasn’t.” The bit drew a flood of reactions online—some amused, others critical of Meyers for making light of a serious political moment. One viewer wrote, “I read that Trump and Mamdani got along well during their meeting, but hadn’t realized how much Trump fawned over him until watching this.” Another, less impressed, argued, “Meyers is too busy snickering to notice the city burning.”
For all the viral levity, Mamdani held firm to his beliefs. In a subsequent interview with NBC, he said, “Everything that I’ve said in the past I continue to believe. I think it is important in our politics that we don’t shy away from where we have disagreements.” He clarified that his goal in meeting the president wasn’t to stage a political confrontation, but to advocate for the needs of New Yorkers. “I’m not coming into the Oval Office to make a point or make a stand. I’m coming in there to deliver for New Yorkers.”
The aftermath of the meeting brought its own share of drama—this time, sartorial. On November 22, President Trump appeared at the White House in a burgundy-red scarf and black overcoat, a notable departure from his usual suit-and-tie attire. Social media quickly erupted with claims that Trump was “copying” Mamdani’s style, circulating a side-by-side image of the two men in seemingly similar outfits. The comparison, however, was built on digital quicksand. As AFP and the Daily Beast later confirmed, the image of Mamdani had been digitally altered; the original, taken in November 2023, showed him in a black turtleneck and gray suit, not the deep reds and blacks of Trump’s ensemble. The manipulated photo, initially posted by an X user who later admitted to the edit, was nonetheless picked up by major outlets and spread widely across Facebook, Instagram, Threads, and X.
The Daily Beast and Hindustan Times both published pieces comparing Trump’s look to Mamdani’s, only to issue clarifications once the truth came out. The episode underscored the speed with which misinformation can spread—and the importance of careful fact-checking, especially in the age of viral images and rapid-fire commentary. As AFP pointed out, this was not the first time manipulated images had fueled false narratives in American politics, and it almost certainly won’t be the last.
Lost in the noise of memes and mockery was a reminder of Mamdani’s broader political identity. A longtime supporter of the Palestinian cause, he has been an outspoken critic of Israel’s actions in Gaza, calling them “genocide.” The original 2023 photo of Mamdani, which became the basis for the altered viral image, was taken at a protest outside the White House demanding a permanent ceasefire and an end to U.S. military aid to Israel. That context, largely absent from the viral fashion debate, speaks to the complex realities underlying even the most meme-worthy political moments.
For all the spectacle—UFC books, viral videos, late-night jokes, and fashion faux pas—the Trump-Mamdani meeting offered a rare glimpse of civility amid the clamor of American politics. Both men, despite their sharp ideological divides and past barbs, managed to find common ground, if only for a brief moment. As Mamdani put it, “I think it is important in our politics that we don’t shy away from where we have disagreements.” In a political landscape often defined by division, that willingness to engage—awkward as it may be—might just be the most newsworthy detail of all.
