Nice, I think this is the most honest confirmation that Mamdani is in fact the best candidate.
They’re really gonna fuck him like Sanders huh
Why even have primaries??
If they don’t respect the candidate elected in the primaries, then the party has to go. I ain’t voting blue no matter who any more. I fell for that these last 3 elections and look how far that took us.
To undermine the actual elections.
Democratic leadership is controlled opposition, there’s no other way to say it
Even Jon Stewart said it this past Monday.
Just like the Republican factions in The Spanish Civil War attacking each other for having the wrong ideology while the Fascists tightened their grip.
Was one of the Spanish Republican factions fascist?
With a wide brush you can paint the picture like this: The Republicans were left wing communists (or at least they wanted a democratic republic) and the Nationalists were right wing fascists.
Nationalists won and they had a dictator (Franco) in Spain from 1939 to 1975.
The “lesser-evil” party. The lesser part maybe true but so is the evil part.
The lesser part maybe true but so is the evil part.
Always has been, otherwise it wouldn’t be called the “lesser-evil” party, it’d be called the “good” party.
We’ve known for decades (and I do mean everyone by ‘we’, I’m not even American) that the democrats are also corporate bootlickers. It’s just that their policies tend to be less anti-human generally. For a while, it was clear: Vote dem, get some consumer protections and slow improvements in healthcare, LGBT rights, etc. Vote republican, get every good thing repealed and new anti-consumer, anti-lgbt, anti-healthcare legislation introduced. Now the dems want to cater to the right for votes and the “lesser” part of “lesser evil” is starting to diminish. They’re still the lesser evil, but they’re also more in the way of true progress than ever.
I am so sick of seeing people abuse the word “tremendous” like this following in asshat’s footsteps, but at least it’s a nice, straightforward way for me to identify people to hit with a baseball bat if I can ever get away with it.
“Democrats will be doing a disservice […] if they don’t come together and decide to support whichever candidate has the most support among them”…
what do you think a primary election is? it is literally seeing who has the most support among democrats. so this guy is the one who is doing the disservice of not deciding to support Zohran
Yeah but the people don’t know who they want. The DNC knows who the people want. This is why I nominate Hillary Clinton as NYC mayor.
yeah, let’s stop “cannibalizing each other’s support” by attacking the nominee and giving support to others. very sound strategy, mr paterson.
sheessh. can’t he SEE that the democrats need new blood
Democrats and Republicans work for the same billionaires. You are about to witness Democrats working against Mamdani like they never have against Republicans.
In a fight between socialism and fascism, liberals will ALWAYS support the fascists.
I believe equally strongly in personal freedoms and individual rights. I think that makes me liberal. Fascism definitely has significantly less of both compared to socialism which is also not what I think of when reading Mamdani’s policies.
“Taxation is theft” people are deranged imo, not liberal; pointing their frustration at the wrong part of the system. Are those the people everyone thinks of when the word liberal comes up?
I really hate statements like this. Not because you are right or wrong, but because your word choices obscure your true meaning when used this briefly.
In the context of this thread, which is clearly US politics, “liberal” has a somewhat different meaning to the majority of the audience than I think you are using. I almost think you are just making rage-bait, but I’ve seen it so many times that I have to respond to someone.
We have a clear dichotomy of our political parties, since we effectively only have two… some words I might use are ‘republican’, ‘conservative’, ‘democrat(ic)’, ‘liberal’, ‘progressive’, ‘socialist’, ‘fascist’, ‘leftist’, ‘right-wing’
Because of human language, these may signify different things based on context.
I identify as a “liberal” in my country. I am also a “democrat”, as well as a “socialist” and a “leftist”. I am anti-trump. I would vote for Mamdani, but I’m not in the area.
When you make absolute statements like “liberals will ALWAYS support the fascists,” you ignore the context. Perhaps in the dictionary sense of the words, a liberal will prefer a fascist government where wealth makes power and they get all the benefit of their work over a socialist one where their input helps everyone. That describes a giant swath of business owners for sure, as well as the ‘taxes are theft’ people. In the US, though, a liberal could mean a person more focused on bodily autonomy, social equality, social safety nets and other more ‘socialist’ concepts.
Another way to put this is that the political words are a 3D venn diagram. When you put your line of liberal = capitalist against someone who is thinking liberal = democrat, you are going to have friction because, based on context, that word lands in different places. I’m going to ignore any ‘all democrats are capitalists’ arguments, or complexities around our election systems. See my post history if you want my opinions there.
If anything, I’d recommend that people clearly define their words, such as a liberal vs a liberal. And even then, you can see that both are capitalist by those definitions even though, colloquially, a person may identify as liberal while preferring socialist ideals.
Basically, any absolutes, especially in the realm of political ideology, makes you a Sith (probably). Also basically, anyone firing off a one-liner in a conversation this fraught is a troll (probably).
the DNC arnt liberal though, they are center right, Dinos for the most part.
Liberal just means they support capitalism as opposed to socialism or feudalism, it covers everyone from Scandinavian social democrats to Javier Gerardo Milei.
Liberalism: A Counter History is free on Annie’s Archive, it goes through the major liberal philosophers, their role in society, and how they handled the contradictions of liberalism.
Those seem like some major contradictions of the concept of liberty. Ty for the book reccomendation.
He can, and he knows he ain’t it
Democrats would rather lose to Republicans than let a single social policy happen.
Ok this is either comedy (if you know) or happenstance (if you don’t know)…
But David Paterson is blind.
And not like “blind allegiance to the party” but actually, legally blind.
Either way, he cannot SEE that the democrats need new blood.
It’s been so fucking ridiculous to watch the US left spend three decades just completely buying into the conservative smear job against the Clintons. Just licking up every drop of the trash they’ve fed you.
Perfect? Not by a long shot. But you’ll be goddamn lucky to ever get another president as qualified and capable as Bill or Hillary ever again.
Bill “Epstein Island” Clinton?
Hillary “Let’s promote Trump and sabotage Bernie” Clinton? Very capable politicians. Have a “ButHerEmails”.
How the Hillary Clinton campaign deliberately “elevated” Donald Trump with its “pied piper” strategy
In its self-described “pied piper” strategy, the Clinton campaign proposed intentionally cultivating extreme right-wing presidential candidates, hoping to turn them into the new “mainstream of the Republican Party” in order to try to increase Clinton’s chances of winning.
The Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee called for using far-right candidates “as a cudgel to move the more established candidates further to the right.” Clinton’s camp insisted that Trump and other extremists should be “elevated” to “leaders of the pack” and media outlets should be told to “take them seriously.”
___
Pat Buchanan would be so fucking stoked to hear anyone on the left parroting this
Pat Buchanan drinks water and you drink water, therefore you are as bad as Pat Buchanan /s
But you’ll be goddamn lucky to ever get another president as qualified and capable as Bill or Hillary ever again.
Provided you’re a billionaire.
“No, I’m not at all susceptible to right wing media messaging”
I mean, I’m not buying your support of two center-right corpodems.
And who are literally a mile to the left of anyone the DNC has to offer.
American “leftists”: ready to throw fists in defense of 1990s Rush Limbaugh talking points but absolutely incensed at the suggestion that they’re not doing enough to stop the fascist overthrow of their government. 🤡
And who are literally a mile to the left of anyone the DNC has to offer.
The clintons and soulless corpodems exactly like them are all the DNC is willing to offer.
American “leftists”: ready to throw fists in defense of 1990s Rush Limbaugh talking points
Why would rush limbaugh say that they’re too far to the right? Just because the clintons are to your left, that doesn’t mean they’re acceptable.
For DNC democrats are the donors and most probably AIPAC. Democrat citizenry are not the target for them.
For AIPAC Mamdani is antithesis to Israel, which is much more important than US.
oh for as long as it’s been a thing, primaries are simply a way for the owning classes to convince themselves they manufactured enough consent. when it fails them they pull this crap and it will all be forgotten when the next season’s newest life changing emergency drops.
I was thinking this myself.
Yeah, but socialists don’t count, obviously. \s
Mamdani: It’s about the policies
Democrats: Gee whiz, you ran such a good campaign
Voters: It’s about the policies
Democrats: Gosh, if only centrists could find such a charismatic guy.
They think everyone but them is so stupid. It’s infuriating that the system is set up so we’re forced to work with these twats.
We found that charismatic centrist they’re looking for. His name is Barack Obama, and we’re still dealing with the fallout of him campaigning on “change” and failing to deliver.
Because of Obama I had health insurance. Because of Obama I was not in medical bankruptcy.
But then again that was almost 10 YEARS AGO. Blaming a black American man for White Backlash is so American it hurts.
Because of Obama the banks got bailed out.
You mean Bush? The meltdown happened before the election. By the time Obama got in office his choices were to finish the plan in place, or create even worse short term upheaval by changing plans.
True. I forgot. Democrats can’t just stop Republican policies when they have full control. Only Republicans can stop Democrat policies. And Obama executing the Bush plan to bail out all the banks and brutally surpress occupy wall street was not his fault. My bad.
Tbf to the previous poster, the Republican party is great at setting up sabotaging and impossible choices for when a democrat is elected. E.G. the tax bill TACO passed in his first term that was set to raise taxes for all people making under 75k in 2025. E.G.2 The troop widthdraw plan in the Middle East that had no preparation done before Biden came to office and all those munitions were left behind.
On your point though, yeah the Dems are beyond completely incompetent each time they have one of those situations. It’d be nice if they stopped pretending politeness and passivity was the same as having good morals.
I might be misremembering, but did Obama federalise the national guard to suppress the protestors? Or was it just the NYPD…
You’re right this makes it better. Trump using the national guard to arrest 1 (one) protester is what crossed the line for me. It’s not about abuse of violence to violate the right to protest and protect the billionaire class. What matters is that Trump did a thing very slightly differently.
I mean, you had a point about the bailouts. I just don’t think you can blame the suppression of Occupy Wall Street protestors on Obama himself. He wasn’t the only neoliberal in charge in 2011. Sure, the FBI and DHS were keeping tabs, but it was the NYPD that did the violent suppression, under orders from Mayor Bloomberg.
The last time a non-change candidate won a presidential election in the US was 2004. No president since Obama has had enough of a majority in congress to enact meaningful change, and it was squandered. It’s not entirely his fault, but as the leader of the Democrats at the time he takes the plurality of responsibility. The ACA started off as a change that could have fixed healthcare in the US but got watered down into propping up a fundamentally broken system.
Trying to deflect a politicians legitimate failures as racism or sexism is so Democrat it hurts. Yes, racism and sexism played a part in Trump winning, but discontent with the status quo pushed him over the finish line. If racism and sexism alone are enough to fuel the Trump regime and keep it in power, then I guess it’s time to flee the country, because we’re a lost cause.
He should have ripped heaven from earth for that supreme court seat.
Less infighting and more pushing things forward would have been great too. Playing for reelection is a loosing position; I want to see more aggression with policy change.
Leaders move masses. Look at Lincoln, look at either Roosevelt (who didn’t even come from the working class). They had a vision and they pulled the country towards that vision. I refuse to believe that out of 350million of us there aren’t a couple people capable of being real leaders. ‘we don’t have the votes’ - so get them. Bernie Sanders was polling at less than 1% when he entered the race against Clinton, and he nearly beat her by building a movement. The reason they don’t have the votes is because they don’t want them. They don’t actually believe in progressive policies.
This is a bullshit talking point.
Obama was full of shit. Fuck neoliberals
He can have done some good and still have been bad overall.
deleted by creator
Barack… Obama? Oh! You mean Captain Drone Strikes?
Gosh, if only centrists could find such a charismatic guy.
The Overton window has moved so far right that the DNC only has humorless executives and dead faced lawyers left as candidates.
I think you mean right
As long as Democrats block popular leftist policy they are no better than the Republicans.
If a party only allows policy that consolidates wealth into the hands of the rich then it is useless to workers.
Sorry babe, but vote blue no matter who.
And, uh, by blue we mean red this time.
overton window. US democrats are not considered democrats in other western countries. You have no “left” party worth voting for.
Democrats are more scared of the left than Nazis.
changemymind.png
As (neo)liberals, they stand to lose a lot if real leftists were ever in control.
Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds
Well they are still on X which is owned by a guy who does Nazi salutes and whose AI chat bot calls himself Mecha Hitler ~(over giga Jew, but still wrong choice)~
So they will stay on that platform but won’t vote for this guy, yeah your comment rings pretty true
F A C T S
Glances at Eric Adams
Some of those that work forces…
sometimes ya gotta…
We cannot aford ideas without a plan for implementation or funding.
From Zohran’s site:
Taxes on big corporations and the wealthiest New Yorkers
Zohran has a plan to bring down the cost-of-living through city-owned grocery stores, universal childcare, and other bold proposals, and he knows exactly how to pay for it, too. Zohran’s revenue plan will raise the corporate tax rate to match New Jersey’s 11.5%, bringing in $5 billion. And he will tax the wealthiest 1% of New Yorkers—those earning above $1 million annually—a flat 2% tax (right now city income tax rates are essentially the same whether you make $50,000 or $50 million). Zohran will also implement common-sense procurement reform, end senseless no-bid contracts, hire more tax auditors, and crack down on fine collection from corrupt landlords to raise an additional $1 billion.
There’s some unspoken words there:
We cannot aford ideas without a plan for implementation or funding.
“…that must not impact our wealthy donors.”
Shhhh, their corporate doners are trying to push propaganda through them! Stop defending a candidate who is not at all sympathetic towards the upper class!
the DNC is so desperate they had to pull cumuo out of the dredges of the sewer as a candidate. im guessing alot of rich billionaires live in or around NYC so they wouldnt want a democrat mayor most of the time, they want a status quo to be maintained.
They’ve spent more time and effort going after Mamdani than they did trying to stop the “Big Beautiful Bill.”
Hey, don’t be disingenuous, they got the name changed in the senate and Booker stood tall with his little-league baseball bat! You can’t expect perfection!
le sigh
/S because this is the world we live in…
Well yeah, easier to fundraise this way.