You're viewing a single thread.
Wait why are democrats fighting him? I thought he was socialist or something
Democrats aren't fighting him, the DNC (Democratic National Convention) is. The party doesn't want him as their representative, because he doesn't match their values. But he represents what the Democrat constituents actually want and the DNC fears losing control over their constituents, so they want to ensure he loses the race.
The DNC and the RNC basically want the same thing, except the Democratic Party is much more subtle about it. The US doesn't actually have a left-wing party. Both our major parties are right-wing by global standards. So any truly left-wing candidates scare them, and they'll fight tooth and nail to keep them out of elections.
Even Cuomo, who was completely stomped in the primaries, is still planning to run in the election as an independent. Their hope is that his run will split the party and make Mamdani lose. If the Democratic Party can't get their man in the election, then they'll throw the race and take everyone down with them.
The DNC and the RNC basically want the same thing, except the Democratic Party is much more subtle about it.
The old RNC. The new Republicans have taken over and actually do want all the fascist hateful stuff. The old guard courted crazies and those crazies took over.
True. The more right the DNC leans, the more extremist right the RNC leans, to differentiates themselves from Democrats.
Yes, yes, everything the Republicans do is actually the fault of the Democrats. I've heard this one.
Which, fuckin' honestly, should be an object lesson for anyone who wants to advance progressive politics in this country. Engage in primary after primary and take over the party from within until the old guard are appalled at what it has become, except do that with good goals instead of horrifying ones.
And remember that by the time the election itself is at hand, it's too late to make meaningful change in the party platform. The primaries are what actually matter when it comes to changing course. Everything after that, it's just a binary choice between which of the major candidates you actually want in power.
I mean the difference is that the old RNC deliberately invited the vampire inside, thinking they could control them. They were supposed to be useful idiots to get extra votes. They were wrong and lost control.
The DNC recognizes that if they ever actually gave the people power they'd never get it back. So they're much more diligent about denying any possible progressive advancement, up to and including damaging their own party to do so.
What's this? nuance in a lemmy comment? Inconceivable.
Wait why are democrats fighting him?
Because he's advocating policies and reforms that run counter to the financial and social interests of the Democratic Leadership
That's actually the exact reason democrats are fighting him.
So he's too far left?
Despite what Fox News may tell you, the Democrats (well, the DNC leadership in particular) aren’t “left.”
They are when they are being called radical.
I'm just going off of what was said in the prior comment. I haven't looked anything up quite yet
Then why are you commenting?
To converse and learn. To engage with the community and gain perspective.
There's way more nuance than Lemmy pretends. It's difficult to deal with, because there's a lot of nuance and several grains of truth lying around.
They're afraid if someone on "their side" is out there yelling "I'm a socialist", that it'll scare the donors. That much is true.
Lemmy forgets that you need donors and allies to win elections. I honestly think many people pushing the "both sides" narrative actively want us all to lose.
We don't need to be as beholden to donors as the general Democrats are. We have a lot of room for Democratic Socialist policies. But if we use our platforms to yell about how both sides are the same, well, first, they're absolutely fucking not, and second, that's going to get people to stay home and lose elections.
We need to pull the party to the left. Partly that'll help win elections. IF we don't sink the boat while we're doing it.
Zohran Mamdani won against Cuomo, despite Cuomo having the billionaire donors.
Also the Democrats running after billionaire donors orders had them loose to Trump not once but twice.
Uhh but Zohran got donors from the people. 20k people donated to his campaign fund. You don't need billionaires to fund your campaign.
Heck, look at Kickstarter. They still manage to get millions from the regular people.
"We can't elect people who do the things we want, otherwise we won't be able to elect people who do the things we want."
If he gets elected that proves the entire premise wrong.
We can elect the people we want. We also need to elect some that aren't perfect. That's how Democracy works.
You aim to get some ideal representatives, some less than ideal representatives and maybe some real compromises, and you team up against the literal fucking Nazis.
That doesn't mean we have to be the ones to compromise every time. Looking forward to this NYC election.
And he's probably not even particularly left.
Maybe, but not if he wants to live long.
That's why they're fighting him. Money go brr and money is scared.
What I'm gathering is that he's popular with the people but not the people with money lol
More or less
He's popular with the voters. He's going to stomp New York, and then he'll start looking at the presidency. And he might win that, too. And then they'd have to pass bills, and their donors would be mad.
They'd rather run bad candidates and lose.
He's not eligible to run for president because he was born in Uganda.
Damn, I forgot the constitution was racist
Fortunately the constitution doesn't matter anymore. Run him anyway!
It's not actually a racist policy. People born in the US, regardless of race, can run for president. People born outside of the US, regardless of race, cannot. Xenophobic, maybe? But not racist. Arnold Swarzenegger can't run for president either. Neither can Elon Musk.
Mamdani would mop the floor with Trump.
I was about to say that Trump has already been elected twice, and then I remembered that that's not going to stop him.
Honestly if you put the DNC in other countries they wouldn't be considered left.
Even the UK who's current "left" PM is actually extremely centre, but compare the DNC to him they would still be more right than him.
In any other country they'd be the conservative party.
Now do you believe people when they say they have a 2 party system with Republicans vs
Democratsother republicans?BoTh SiDeS
Books are where it's at!
Edit: Why do you dislike books so much?
It's abundantly obvious the parties are different. I'm snarky because so many mental sloths exist. Be bothered to think and I'll be less snarky. Specific, non-hyperbolic factual criticisms are not what I take issue with.
If you say the parties are the same you're either revealing how grossly ignorant you are, or what a liar you are. No grey area there really.
Just look at how they voted in tabling to be able to vote on if Trump's articles of impeachment. Way too many democrats voted yes to not vote on it. It's as if most of them don't want to look at the fascism happening, and stick their heads in the sand. In my blue state only one voted to hear the articles of impeachment. Fuck.
Books are where it's at!
Edit: Why is this getting downvoted?
Lol I'm the state agent here, Vlad
All for the sake of hatred of books. Books are where it's at!
Edit: Why are you downvoting my love of books?
Because you're posting like someone without two brain cells to rub together.
Books are where it's at!
Of all the reasons to impeach Trump, the one selected in that case was the most precarious.
It should be unacceptable for the president to unilaterally make such a risky military maneuever, however you can cite some precedent in every administration for over 60 years. So you have to answer why only this time is the president impeachable for a unilateral strike when that has been normal for presidents for a very long time.
I get it, it's unconscionable how Netanyahu has treated Gaza and the West Bank, it's supremely risky how they and the US engaged with Iran. It's shocking this level of military risk can be incurred by the executive branch without warning. However without some laws indicating the status quo has changed, there's nothing to hold the office accountable for being consistent with every other administration in living memory.
Besides, while reactions over Gaza have significantly more popular sympathy for the Palestinians, the popular opinion of the Iranian regime is not so sympathetic, and thus far the nature of the strikes seem to be more surgical in nature than what has happened in Gaza, so this isn't exactly the political opinion to bet everything on.
Trump's administration almost daily gives more unique and blatantly illegal behaviors that could be the focus of articles of impeachment, and this was just a poor choice.
Books are where it's at!
If they're the same, you wouldn't even need to say it
You're right, they're not the same.
Red MAGA is evil, Blue MAGA too but they are hypocrites about it.
So worseI tagged you perfectly
go cry somewhere else fascist lite,or I'll block your annoying genocider apologist ass
Go for it, you're doing nothing but trying to discourage votes away from Republican fascism so I'm not too concerned about your feelings or if you block me
Same donors = same interests
BoTh SiDeS me no see difference because difference challenge me
Trump always bad so our side always good.
Little projection from Blue MAGASaying "blue maga" = "Putin is my daddy"
You sound a lot like someone I know who would be evading ban if they're here. You'll be caught if that's so.
LOL lame BS, why dont you say it's anti-semitic?
https://citizenactionny.org/2025/06/27/citizen-action-of-new-york-condemns-senator-gillibrands-racist-remarks-towards-assemblymember-zohran-mamdani/
Racist fanboy POS
Blocking you now, you disgust me.
Glad they will put your miserable fash partyall in the trash with the Red MAGA.Good, now I can call out one more scumbag without garbage takes in my inbox.
The VOTERS of each party are different. The actual leaders of each party, the actual people running the party apparatus? There's very little difference between the parties in terms of actual leadership.
One party sometimes pretends to help, the other viciously kills all in its path and is proud of it. Yep, basically the same. Sometimes I cannot tell Bernie Sanders from Trump. Same person.
He said billionaires shouldn't exist. If billionaires didn't exist who would fund their campaigns running on platforms that allow billionaires to hoard wealth unimpeded?
Yeah but like... Fuck billionaires. A billion dollars is 50,000/yr for 20,000 years.