Mamdani, a proudly socialist 33-year-old, holds a 44-36 percent lead over over former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo – who was hoping that New Yorkers had short memories, and were ready to re-elect the textbook centrist Democrat.
However, after the disaster of Trump’s first year back in the White House – with everyday American life interrupted by protests, immigration raids, corruption allegations and the unshakebale feeling that the nation is about to enter World War 3… It seems the pendulum is swinging back towards left-wing politics.
It appears that the success of Mamdani isn’t so much a vote against Trumpian politics, but more a vote against the stale nothingness of the Democrats top brass – who, while pitching themselves as the progressive option in America’s political system, very seldom action – or even – offer – left-wing policies.
deleted by creator
Reality has a very onion bias these days
This article isn’t reality, though. The title claims Democrats reacted, but has no examples of Democrats reacting to anything. I think it might just be very clever Satire and the people in these threads biting into it are the punchline.
There’s also kind of an answer here to why people voted for Trump.
People are angry. They don’t necessarily know the best policies to resolve the country’s poor direction, but it’s clear to so many people that what we have isn’t working.
Many of us have had a conversation over drinks with a confident person at a party who maybe has a job you don’t understand well, and who just speaks confidently about all the things that are fucked up, and what they’d do in charge. As long as they don’t make claims of “Things are mostly okay”, they can make up any target: Immigrants, trans people, government overspending on overseas programs. The key is, they have to match the voter’s anger. The rest follows naturally.
I’d also say that’s how Obama got elected. He had a message of hope and change.
Old guy Biden planted trees despite knowing he’d never see the shade. Harris said she’d care for the trees and let them grow so everyone would have shade. Electorate grows impatient. Trump promises to chop down all the saplings, and electorate somehow decides this will get them shade more quickly
Old guy Biden planted trees despite knowing he’d never see the shade.
That’s a very generous way to describe selling weapons for genocide.
I know people who voted for Trump specifically because they thought the best way to make things better in the long run was to elect someone who would make things drastically worse first. That it was necessary for him to win to teach a lesson to various dysfunctional parts of the system that would otherwise be complicit in a decline to the same destination, differing only in speed.
It’s unfortunate that fascists don’t give back power. I have a coworker who was getting fed up with people like Macron succeeding over here, and he was saying “sometimes I wonder about Le Pen getting elected, maybe it’ll work to show how bad they really are at doing anything and people will finally vote left” (he’s from Algeria, he absolutely 150% isn’t a far right voter or even heavily religious himself) and when he saw Trump the first time, on Jan. 6, it finally registered in his head that you really can’t give fascists a single step in the door, ever, even if they’re shit at doing anything, you have to erase them everywhere because they’re not shit at keeping and abusing power.
What’s even more unfortunate is that the other people who are in power most of the time (“center right”) don’t actually want to keep fascists out of power if doing anything costs them power.
What’s even more unfortunate is that the other people who are in power most of the time (“center right”) don’t actually want to keep fascists out of power if doing anything costs them power.
Like you said, fascists don’t give back power.
I have two points to add to this:
1 - As a liberal, there was nothing more frustrating than having to vote for Kamala, a candidate who was aggressively “pro-cop”, especially as many in the country were protesting for defunding cops. Youre not going to energize most people with an angle like “You want us to vote to stop Trump?”
2 - As a person who is part of the black/immigrant community, the government has a history of ignoring us for decades. It’s not the federal government, but the local government too. Systematic racism has always kept us down. And I hate to say it, Trump got a wall going. Trump has ICE harassing immigrants. These are newsworthy events, even if they’re in the wrong fucking direction. But a Democrat has a history of never wanting to create a ripple as they appeal to all sides.
Don’t worry guys. I’m sure the democrats will learn this this time around…
Susan collins is that you?
I think the only option is to not vote for them if they don’t.
sure seems like thats what they want by now
Thats what you have to do. If they get voted out when they choose not to follow these policies then maybe they’ll learn it is a problem. “Vote blue no matter who” is extremely damaging
I voted green when Labour abandoned the working class in the UK
The opposition doesn’t believe in elections, so I don’t think that’s a viable plan.
The opposition doesn’t believe in elections
And centrists don’t believe in primaries.
Just like the dems who constantly sue the greens to be off ballots?
TBF the RNC, such as The Badger Values PAC, did actively promote the Greens before the 2024 election, so yeah. Even David Duke supported Jill Stein while the European Greens publicly asked her to step down. She called both the DNC and GOP fascists, and if you believe that then idk if I can convince you otherwise because clearly factual evidence won’t change your opinions.
If you want fair election reform then vote blue, you’ll never get it with more than 40 Republicans in the senate.
If you want fair election reform then vote blue, you’ll never get it with more than 40 Republicans in the senate.
This is inaccurate. We need 50 democrats to do away with the filibuster for good.
But even if we had 100 Democrats, they would find the no votes and you would make excuses.
If Mamdani pulls it off, I hope he can keep his promises or at least give a good fight for common sense. For the moment, the USA is fucked up.
It appears that the success of Mamdani isn’t so much a vote against Trumpian politics, but more a vote against the stale nothingness of the Democrats top brass
People worth their salt, especially academics, mentioned this multiple times, neoliberal politics is no longer working. People want anything away from the forty-year old, outdated policies. Populism is getting a bad rap (either unintentionally or deliberately) but it is simply democracy. When surveyed, many voters who’d be open to vote right are also willing to vote left provided that bread and butter issues that affect day-to-day lives are addressed. Mamdani won the primary because he ran on providing common sense policies that the duopoly parties and oligarchs have brainwashed many Americans to fear. It seems that Americans are gradually waking up from establishment conditioning.
If American progressives continue with running on addressing bread and butter issues, and take away the narrative from the right, then the country could be saved from fascism. There may not need be a civil war to oust the Trump administration, but only time will tell.
I have met a shocking number of Trump voters who really like or liked Bernie Sanders. That number is four, but it’s still shocking and I don’t go out much. Obviously they aren’t paying much attention to policy or reality, but I wonder how common this is? My father-in-law is one.
Removed by mod
I have you tagged as a whacky RP account in my client, but your posts have been markedly sane as of late.
Is it the meds?
I’ve reported your harassment so many times and the mods never care, so I’m taking care of it myself this time.
The Bernie-to-Trump pipeline is real. They both promised to shake things up, but the Democrats decided that they’d rather promote Trump, then let Bernie win. Most voters are sick of the status quo, but they don’t know enough of the details, and vote for whichever candidate promises to fix things.
They like Trump because he promises change. They also like Bernie because he also promises change. But for the last three elections, the Democrats have run status-quo politicians that keep telling the voters everything is fine. And the voters aren’t having it.
Now we have a chance to point out the direction that the Democrats need to turn to if they want to actually win.
Frankly I don’t know what folks should have otherwise expected. The “standard” candidate was a former governor who left the office in disgrace after misconduct.
Even if people were for whatever reason skeptical of a progressive candidate, the business as usual candidate was such a bad idea that people would rather go for it than vote for Cuomo.
Now we watch as Cuomo probably ruins everything by running in the general anyway. The same reason why people say the progressives that can’t win Democrat primaries should bow out for general elections without RCV applies to “centrists” in the same boat. A progressive candidate won fair and square, stay out of his way.
With Adams and Cuomo running as independents, I think they are going to split the vote of the people that weren’t voting for Mamdami anyway, and is going to actually help him.
They knew, that’s why they threw Bernie Sanders under the bus over and over. The ones controlling the DNC do not want to lose their corporate backers if they allow true social equality.
Vote with your feet. Leave the country!
Since the problem is inequality, maybe the majority should stay and the corporate backers should leave.
I think this article would be fine if it didn’t make that claim in the title. But the claim as it stands is a lie, there are no examples in the text of Democrats reacting, and shock or disbelief are not what I’m seeing in the mainstream. Whats more it also makes the claim that none of the DNC’s policies are left.
See that is a better article than this one, but it still also doesn’t mention any of the people who congratulated Mamdani despite endorsing Cuomo, including 42nd President of the United States Bill Clinton, Minority Leaders Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, and even Cuomo himself.
Cuomo begrudgingly congratulating Mamdani after viciously smearing him as an anti-semitic terrorist and leaning into Islamophobia:
*pats self on back I’m such a great upstanding sex pest. How gracious am I! I do very much enjoy the sound of my own voice. That mom-dommy fella sure is something, I wish him the best, even though I insisted he wants to murder jews. Oh well!
The top two Democratic leaders in Congress, Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, both New Yorkers, declined to endorse Mamdani even as they applauded his victory.
Did you read the article?
Is them congratulating him for winning supposed to be an example of them being “shocked”?
Endorse is something you do before an election to signal who your favorite is.
You said it didn’t have any one congratulating him, which they begrudgingly did…
deleted by creator
Ah I see your point now, thanks.
Yeah overall a much better article that the satire one.
Here, I’ll fix it for you:
Establishment Democrat On Lemmy Angered By Success Of Left-Wing Candidate Offering Left-Wing Policies To Left-Wing Voters
Dems continue to be baffled by the popularity of progressive politicians. They can’t fathom Americans wanting less & less to do with their moderate-right-wing bullshit, while the far-right moves farther & farther right.
It’s the foreign influence within the DNC brought in after private money flooded US politics. Get rid of Citizens United and the system will do a lot to correct itself.
It’s always foreigners, isn’t it? What about the domestic private money flooding US politics? What, because they’re American billionaires, it’s fine?
When the GOP vacations in Moscow and the DNC allows Palestinians genocide. Yeah, it’s totally a domestic based set of issues only. For fuck sake, be real.
No “only” but primarily. Domestic billionaires are the primary enemy, they’re the ones who directly benefit from making things like rent and healthcare more expensive, they’re the ones who benefit from keeping unions weak and disorganized, they’re the ones who benefit from mass surveillance and the police state. Foreign billionaires might benefit from doing those things in their own countries, but for the most part we have more to fear from our own rich people than from other countries’ rich people.
Lol, no it really isn’t. Citizens vs United was the culmination of decades of the DNC constantly bending over backwards to compromise with conservatives.
Basically in the late 80’s and early 90’s the legislative grid lock we all know and love today was becoming the status quo. So a strategy of compromising with “moderate” conservatives over policy that benefited aspects of both parties was popularized by the Clinton’s.
This “Thirdway politics” led to short term benefits, and allowed the Clintons to get a death grip over the DNC. After a short period conservatives took advantage of this tactic of compromise to drag the DNC further and further to the right. Basically every sitting senator and most of the politicians in the house made their political careers by being the best at compromising with the right.
I was under the impression moderate compromise was code for working to satisfy donor demands. Which wouldn’t be so pressing with meaningful campaign finance reform.
It was definitely touted as one of the benefits of Thirdway politics. However, the real imperative was ending gridlock in Congress. Back in the late 80s and early 90s gridlock was new and actually seen as a big problem, especially after it caused a gov shut down under newt. Bill Clinton basically swept the presidential race for his second term for “solving it”.
I was under the impression moderate compromise was code for working to satisfy donor demands.
At best. Usually it just means rank capitulation to fascists.
If I said the reason you have a bruised face is because you’re advertising that anyone is free to punch you for 10 dollars, am I blaming the bruises on the people that punched you or am I blaming you?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
You call everyone to your left tankie scum.
Shhhh he doesn’t know how much he’s telling on himself when he does that
Not moderate, not center, firmly not-openly-sociopathic-yet right.
Wait, so if candidates actually run on what voters want, they can succeed?
Amazing
Yes, because the new normal expectation is that common sense is far from common, and that no matter who you vote for, the results will be more of everything that’s wrong with the world
My expectation is that this will motivate them to pull another Ross Perot. They will spend all of their time working with Republicans between this election and the next dreaming up institutional hurdles to a socialist making headway in a political campaign, just like they made it institutionally impossible for third parties to sniff a presidency.
If Mamdani actually does try to do the things he says he will (which I doubt) those efforts to institutionally hamper non-conservative candidacies will be doubled.
That’s pretty positive honestly, my bet is they try to imprison or kill him like every other popular socialist in modern history.
Seems pretty darn likely that the zionists will try to kill him.
I think it will depend on Cuomo and the polling. It might be that Cuomo’s presence is enough to dilute Mamdani’s advantage in the election and I have no doubt the billionaires don’t care if it’s Adams or Cuomo sending public money their way.
But they’re definitely doubling down on gatekeeping political candidacy.
Posting this to offend the white supremacist mods in the politics forum
I’ll add a tangentially connected piece of my own opinion - immigration is clearly beneficial, following a few simple rules:
-
No labor migration, unless it’s a wider agreement meaning citizens another country can freely cross the border. Otherwise a labor migrant can be threatened by deportation, thus becoming legally disadvantaged de-facto. The points further describe immigration, a one-way ticket.
-
No legal disadvantage, an immigrant should be certain that if they get robbed\killed\bullied, there’s a legal mechanism that will work to get some kind of justice (until they get citizenship).
-
No filters other than quota, sufficient language knowledge and personal crime history. Filters can be easily abused. Except one - they must have a plan on how do they intend to make their living. Needed in most countries even for long-term visas, so not much to ask. A crowd of third-world country peasants trying to sneak somehow speaking worse English than me (not in text) is not going to pass that. Or if some will - it’s for the better even. The rest can look for some other way.
-
Advanced language, basic history (high school level), law (same), economics (same) and culture (the things that natives usually take for given, like not using your left hand for a handshake in an Arab country, or pop culture references, or the general perception of this and that idea, say, ex-Soviet immigrants in many countries, like some my relatives, seem to think they get to be conservative and racist to “brown” immigrants purely due to skin color and that they themselves are perceived as civilized people, well, LOL, why did you immigrate then) courses for immigrants, with exams mandatory to pass very well to get citizenship. However, their children get citizenship due to being born in the country (and receiving the mandatory education and going through other necessary procedures making them, well, not very different from anyone else in the country).
-
No special support nets for immigrants. No tolerance to, say, crowds of illiterate Afghan people who’ve moved through a few countries, call them shit, but expect to get unemployment payments and social support and live like in heaven once they reach, say, Germany (in this example Germany will be called shit too once the person sees that there it’s too expected that they find a job and work for themselves).
-
Maybe programs to help new immigrants with finding a job are fine.
I generally think that citizenship of some countries being an unachievable dream for some who don’t have it is a wrong situation. Horizontal mobility has been historically a source of good things. Just have to make sure the rule #3 is followed. And rule #4 - people in some countries live so differently from the west, that their perception of it is as of some magic land where white people give them candy and free stuff, some heaven they have to only get into. Rule #2 too - because we don’t know which governments will put which rules into policy, affecting the composition of immigration. Some might prefer ex-Soviet idiots because they vote for people like Trump. Some might prefer Muslims because they vote for the more authoritarian kind of Democrats no questions asked. Some might prefer to let in a wave of poor Afghanis, because it’d be both a good scarecrow for something like sundown towns and a source of cheap labor, affecting labor rights of everyone else and the ability of protests to paralyze economy, for example.
OK, I’m talking about this from Russia, where the problem with Central Asian and other immigrants is that they are basically legally disadvantaged. It’s very hard for them to get citizenship, but as a source of cheap labor they work very well. At the same time they won’t do anything if the employer, say, takes half of their formal pay, or does something else illegal. Without Russian citizenship they in practice can’t do it. All this while technically CIS and EAEU rules forbid all such stuff, but, eh, who can prevent Russia from doing what it can in its own toy integration projects.
Sorry I’m not reading that wall of text, but yes, the US has unequivocally benefitted from migration. It’s a good thing, in many ways, and clearly in our best interest to guide and encourage, to continue taking advantage of.
A big part of our mythos is welcoming immigrants, becoming a “melting pot” combining the strengths of many peoples. While we may struggle to live up to that sometimes, it’s a worthwhile goal to work toward
-
White supremacists mods in the politics forum?
On Lemmy?
Out of the loop here.
They whip out the ban hammer if you talk about actually pushing back against the Nazis. They’re Lemmy’s own Occupy Democrats who post whiny rage bait for karma but still want the status quo protected.
What I’m not shocked about is that they’re so out of touch with what we want.
Who is they? The article doesn’t mention anybody specific, just make shit up as you go?
The. Democrats. It’s literally in the title, pal.
So nobody specific, got it.
they’re aware of what we need; they’re just placing their desire to become richer ahead of it.
Pelosian ethics is a discussion of competing conceptions of the good for Pelosi.
I haven’t thought about her in a while but I kind of assumed she just turned to dust and blew away at some point.
Afaik she had a house dropped on her. Not sure who got the slippers.
Steven crowder is probably wearing them with a dress as we speak.
Crowder is busy sexually harassing guys
I still bet they’re gonna find a way to ignore the results and give us status cuomo.
Presumably Cuomo will run ‘independent’ with the full support of the DNC, then when they split the vote and a Republican wins, they’ll balme progressives for voting wrong in the primary
Subversion is the name of their game. They’d rather lose than put a Progressive in power.
I was wondering about this. If they openly ratfuck Mamdani, that will radicalize a lot of people. If I’m a Clintonite dem/AIPAC agent, maybe I want Zohran to win and then undermine and sabotage his administration as much as possible instead.
Either him or Adams
They’re not though. Every time Democrats have “voted blue no matter who” they’ve told their leaders that the party is on the right path.
*centrist but yeah.
