Some related links, which I should have included in the first place!!
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/zohran-mamdani-democratic-party-establishment/
https://www.axios.com/2025/06/26/democrats-zohran-mamdani-meltdown-new-york
It wasn’t blue on blue. It was vested interests Vs a genuine candidate. The state of NY voted trump in, not because they like him, because they didn’t want the democrat party. This party as a tool of the corporations is finished. You’re watching its death throes.
NY voted for Kamala?
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-elections/new-york-president-results
NY State voted for Kamala.
LOL I skipped right over that bit.
This party as a tool of the corporations is finished. You’re watching its death throes.
This is the most optimistic take I’ve seen and I like it.
Follow the money, perhaps? Cui bono
But Republicans and Democrats are completely different parties.
/s
They are, one is shit, the other is absolute shit.
I can assure you that the Democrat candidate Zohran Mamdani is going to be infinitely better than the Republican Sliwa.
Don’t worry, I’m sure that if moderate Democrats succeed in their rabid crusade against Zohran and he gets defeated then they’ll turn around and say it was because we didn’t back Cuomo 1000% and without criticism, going back through your comment history and quoting this comment back to you every time you share any political opinion whatsoever.
But they’re super serious about opposing Trump, pinky promise.
It’s basically a way for the ruling class to see whether they can be more blatant on their exploits.
Every republican win means the people can stomach more of the squeezes.
Trump barely beat Harris.
Cuomo got crushed in this primary.
Trump by no means barely beat Harris, she and Clinton were both around 220 votes and Trump has an easy 300.
bro trump cheated the second time lmao.
I’m no fan of the guy but I haven’t heard anything about him cheating. Are you referring to the voting machine controversy? I’m probably uninformed, just trying to understand where you’re coming from
Just my opinion with no proof honestly.
Here’s why. I live in WI, a super swing state that went Democrat for Biden. For Trump’s second term A LOT of people voted, seemed like more than usual. I knew one person who voted for trump personally (she regrets it now but that’s besides the point) but I mean. My work with around 5000 employees all bash trump on group chats whenever he can be used as a joke for something. And we got hit hard with tariffs (by we I mean our customers)
Ranting
To the point. So in Wisconsin trump won as president, but every other Democrat candidate on the ballot also won. Which for maga is unheard of. No one likes tony evers, even Dems don’t like him that much. No one likes Tammy Baldwin and Ron Johnson is like the most Republican POS you can get, but yet Tammy still won that ballot. And I have only heard that maga “votes red the whole ballot”
And then there are also uncounted ballots here as well, which wouldn’t have changed anything, but in my opinion with Elon being president for a few months might have been some kind of deal he had with trump to kind of sway the decision.
There’s also trump early tweet about fraud in some states before the counting was even finished that he ended up winning anyways.
The electrical college will always look different ways because winner takes all voting. It’s all that matters at the end, but a 1.5% change in the voters would have flipoed most of the battleground states. It was closer than many make it out to be
…60 goddamn percent of the country either voted for Trump, or didn’t vote at all, meaning they voted for Trump. Explain to me how she barely lost.
That’s not even true. Less than 50% of the people who voted, voted for Trump.
He didn’t do much better than 2020 when he lost. The U.S. population increased by 2.5% from 2020 to 2024.
Numerically with the population growing by the 2.5% we saw a 4.5% drop in voting in 2024.
Reasons are all speculation.
The fact that “closer” can be so diametrically opposed indicates a failure in the system.
If it was close we’d have gotten, I don’t know, Mitt Romney or somebody.
But the winner-take-all aspect means we get the dumbest, ugliest fascists ever. Just for a 1.5% difference.
This is what a broken system looks like.
Um, “fighting” Donald Trump.
Its as if the oligarchs dont like it when a candidate that is not endorsed by them wins
we shall destroy the democratic party and rebuild it in our image
And then we will get rid of the awful and outdated “First Past the Post” style of voting and the Electoral College. Maybe do some term limits for Supreme Court justices as well.
deleted by creator
Yes. A lost of people didn’t vote in the US elections last year. The ones who don’t live there make up the largest contingent. They’re unlikely to blame themselves.
What a bad faith comment.
Two things can be true.
Democrats have let me down way more than Republicans. At least Republicans will do what they say they’re gonna do.
So, an ML Leftist? Sounds about right. If we can’t have the PERFECT candidate, it’s best to just burn everything down in a fit of rage. Forward progress be damned, it’s their way or it’s a vinegary piss fit.
This bullshit take is old enough to drink. I know, I was there in the year 2000 when it was born.
So, an ML Leftist?
That position isn’t specific to ML tendencies. I personally see more anti-electoralism rhetoric from anarchists, for obvious ideological reasons.
I bring it up here on Lemmy, because it was primarily the ML leftists (on Lemmy) that pushed the idea to skip voting as a way to protest Kamala as a choice…that it was better to permit an authoritarian to take office than allow a centrist democrat. I would 100% would have liked someone like Bernie taking office, but when I’m presented with ‘kick in the nuts’ vs being castrated as my only options, I’ll take the ‘kick in the nuts’ everytime.
Observation: Democratic leaders are openly abandoning the “vote blue no matter who” standard when a leftist manages to win a major primary.
Your response: "when a centrist wins, remember to vote blue no matter who!’
In an ideal world, I would pick a progressive 10/10 times.
However we don’t live in an ideal world. If your options are warm, stale beer or a steaming cup of shit, I’m going to pick the better option, every time. I’ll push for more ideal options the next go around, but I won’t sink the ship and damn me and everyone to having to deal with shit the next 4 years because I didn’t get what I want.
I wish there was a warm, stale beer option. I saw a steaming cup of shit, and a steaming cup of piss with a pride-flag on the side. Is one better than the other? sure, but lets stop pretending either was a remotely acceptable option.
“I don’t think we should bomb children”, “I think medial-debt shouldn’t be the largest cause of bankruptcy in our country”, “People should be able to oppose genocide”, “cops shouldn’t be able to assault innocent people without consequence”
“PERFECT candidate”
I think your definition of “perfect” might be a little off, as I think those are all fairly reasonable to ask for.
I can’t speak for the creator of the meme, but you have not described me.
Hi. I voted for Harris last year. I am also more mad at the Democrats than the Republicans. The Republicans are doing project 2025 and everything they ran on. The Democrats can’t do shit. They suck at being opposition. They broke the filibuster record for NO REASON. Not to prevent a trump appointment. Just because they want theatre politics. They are still voting for them, so yeah I’m more mad at the controlled opposition because I thought they would be actual opposition.
NOW the DNC wants to form some unified front? NOW? Really after all of these people VOTED for him. They are clowns and need to be replaced. Making a third party might not be viable but taking over the DNC like trump did the rnc is.
“You must have not voted” is a liberal’s equivalent of a Zionist’s “you’re an anti-Semite!”
It’s fun watching you kids realize that the Democratic party isn’t the place to go for real change. I was there after Kucinich lost the primary in 2000 and then when Gore gave up fighting for his votes.
Also: You have to vote for them no matter how much you hate them. If Fetterman wins his primary next time I MUST vote for him or I am letting Republicans win.
As opposed to Chuck Schumer who also lets Republicans win.
Im working on it.
I was there after Kucinich lost the primary in 2000 and then when Gore gave up fighting for his votes.
Me too grandpa.🙂
You kids and your Gores and Kuciniches. Pepperidge Farm remembers Mondale/Ferraro. Shit, we remember McGovern.
You got me on McGovern!
Helping a Fetterman win means not only does another republican win, but a republican now has power within the democratic party. Every Pelosi will have to lose an election, primary or general if we are to get a party that even desires to stop the Republicans.
Republicans have had power in the Democratic Party for decades. Lieberman, Manchin, Sinema, and probably more I don’t remember.
And everyone makes excuses for them rather than kicking them out.
Exactly, so when a Chuck Schumer wins a primary, feel no compulsion to vote for them in the general. Vote Blue No Matter Who folks were wrong the whole time.
For some of us, the 2016 Democratic primary was quite illuminating. I’m glad to see people are catching up finally.
sO yOu ArE sAyInG “bOtH sIDeS eQuAlLy BaD”?!?!?!
cOnGrAtULaTiOnS oN gEtTiNg TrUmP eLeCtEd!! :(
It’s like the second you notice parallels in our two party system, they misrepresent you as saying they are EXACTLY the same in EVERY REGARD.
Meanwhile, we no longer question why we only have two parties to vote for in the first place. Hint: the two parties keep it that way.
American Progressives party, anybody? Not sure how we get on ballots, though. Give me a game plan and I’ll start working.
💯
the Dems are in cahoots with the same elite that are in cahoots with the Reps. the dems and reps pretend to be on opposite ends of a spectrum, but they are both sucking up to capitalists and their corporations
By definition that makes them all rightwing authoritarians aka fascists, which checks out.
What it actually makes them is zionist controlled opposition. You don’t get zionist occupied government without having zionist occupied parties. The US government does whatever is good for Israel even if it is bad for the American people, so yes, we have zionist occupied government.
So you shouldn’t be surprised that the current in power dems have more loyalty to that than any ideology / policy take. It’s a club and they have to maintain it by controlling who’s in it.
The guy, unfortunately for him, has a very human and natural position on Gazan genicide. And that’s just not permissible.
Crazy how much people at large have moved past the whole religious zealotry thing, but the people in charge are still having their holy wars and crusades, fulfilling their biblical prophecies and “divine right.” I thought for those in charge this whole religion thing was just a mechanism for power, what’s crazy to me is it actually looks like they believe that shit.
It’s very simple. One of these people blindly supports Israel no matter what it does, up to and including genocide, and the other one doesn’t.
Donald Trump is useful to the real power.
He does support Israel.
getting pretty close to time to just start referring to the DNC as fascist adjacent. playing lame duck to this particular psychopath is way too old and fucking irresponsible a decade later.
especially when they pull this crap at the same time
I hope you never thought these people were there for you. At least after the age of about 22, 23?
you’re right, it was exactly 23 for me. how did you know? did we get the same radicalization update from the Clinton family trying to make the Whitehouse a family home like the Bush’s did?
Nationalism ✔️ imperialism ✔️ mixed economy for the benefit of the bourgeoisie ✔️ labor suppression ✔️ caters to middle class&petty bourgeois ✔️
Did the DNC say something about Mamdani?
Did hitler murder anybody?
An extreme example, sure, but if you control an apparatus, how much responsibility should you take for their actions?
I was just asking because I literally didn’t know what this was referring to.
It’s pretty much covered in these articles. There are more, but this should give you an overview.
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/zohran-mamdani-democratic-party-establishment/
https://www.axios.com/2025/06/26/democrats-zohran-mamdani-meltdown-new-york
Well leading up to the election they surely had indicated their pick was Cuomo. I’m not sure if this is about policy as much as the leadership assumes brand recognition from a previously electable candidate is more important than anything else.
In the aftermath the only concrete information was the two representatives that said they still didn’t like him. There’s reports of some rich dudes thinking about throwing money behind Cuomo or even Adams, but I didn’t see concrete outcomes on that.
It’s clear they wanted a different outcome, but I’m not so sure I’m seeing this “party melting down” people are declaring. I’ll agree when significant Democrats continue to undermine and go so far as to try to make Cuomo happen despite the results, but for now I’ll reserve judgement.
Only one is an actual threat to how the Democrats do things.
It’s like how Disney makes a big deal about being progressive while making a movie about a space cop who uses her weapons to intimidate indigenous populations.
