Mamdani Winning Juice Rule

i dont understand anything...

It tries to communicate that libertarians aren’t fascists. Which is incorrect.
- I'm really confused that the libertarian seems to be differing from the Democrats in the meme when Mamdani won the primary and is endorsed by the Democrats. I'm not doubting there are people who typically vote blue who wouldn't like him (and some might not even vote because of it, or prefer Cuomo), but they certainly don't fit the stereotypes of the characters on the left in this meme.
  This is just "It's too late democrats, I've depicted you as the foolish soyjak and the libertarians as the noble chad."
- libertarianism is about how the government should f off (appealing if you're already rich)
  fascism is about how all power should be vested in a single person who leads everyone towards the will of the nation (appealing if you're stupid and a bit of a romantic)
  admittedly today's "libertarians" are often in name only
- Today I learned that voting for a democratic socialist is fascist.
You're not alone. This is one inane meme.
Well this here is Earth. That over there is a beetle. Those up there are clouds. Oooh and babies come from a stork. I have no idea what a stork is but I've been assured that's where babies come from.
- Please don't assume everyone is American.
- water u talkin about?... i was geniunely askin whats up with this post - there r some symbols i feel one already needs to kno to understand it.... u kno? or maybe some stereotypes im unbeknownst of ~~

Yeah that's because most of them are.

If you're in favor of Mamdani you're probably not nearly as right-leaning as the vast majority of americans who would label themselves as libertarian.

Political pluralism unfortunately doesn't really count for shit in a winner-takes-all election system that doesn't allow proportional representation, but I digress.

Well how are we supposed to get the proportional representation without the pluralism? If everybody consolidates into a single tent what incentive is there for reform? Fusion voting was legal in many states not that long ago.
- At the state level I could see it happening, but unless the action is possible at the federal level, any presented candidate becomes a minor spoiler candidate for any active reformists.
  This is largely a "system is broken, but in order to remove the limitations we need to work inside the system" problem, which I'm aware is frustrating as all hell. As it stands, we still need to consolidate our votes behind one of the two parties to make change because of political structure - and attempting to usurp it from the outside will always fail.

Glossary of Terms:

The people on the left: American Democrats. They hate Republicans, the fascist party of Trump, but many loyal voters don't realize how right wing their own party is in comparison to other countries.

Libertarians: American "Libertarians," which are a right wing minor political party and political movement in America. They have traditionally favored radical deregulation, no taxes, and individual liberties above all else. Unfortunately for right wing Libertarians, the ideology is nonsensical, eventually forcing them to choose between wanting unrestricted capitalism and siding with fascism(like the president of Argentina), or freedom from authority and siding with anarchists(the original libertarians). The poster seems to represent the later perspective.

Liz Cheney: A former Republican who allied with the Democratic Party in opposition to Trump. She has very conservative views, but was seen by Kamala Harris and establishment Democrats as representing an important voting base that could win over. In hindsight, their refusal to embrace more left wing positions might've cost them more than any conservatives they would have alienated.

Mamdani: Democratic candidate for the Mayor of New York. He is from the Democratic Socialist faction of the party, and was strongly opposed by establishment Democrats in the primary race. Many joked that Democrats oppose Mamdani more than they oppose Trump, and I agree. A socialist as the Mayor of a single city isn't gonna change things much, while Trump is an actual dictator who is killing people and ruining lives. The attention paid isn't proportional to importance.

Ah, Mamdami. And his famously libertarian policy stance

yeah, I hope the popular guy wins

The popular candidate winning in a democracy? That doesn't make sense. (This is a joke BTW)
I wouldn't be surprised if the Texas national guard gets sent in intimidate voters. It really just depends on how much rich New Yorkers are willing to pay Trump. Considering how the ultra rich own most of Manhattan, it's a real possibility.

Yeah you've really got three strains of libertarian in America:

Don't tread on me. Folks who are generally republicans that smoke weed. Some believe in abortion others don't.

Don't tread on anyone. Folks who often wind their way to the libleft group though they may remain pro right to start your own business.

Then you've got these sorts.

The first group sucks. The second are often a bit confused. And the third, well I like em but I don't think they should decide laws or policy. And there's middle grounds across all of it. A lot of the Ron Paul people became ordinary progressives for example.