Zohran Mamdani’s campaign represented a struggle for basic dignity and an affirmation of democratic potential. It was ceaselessly denounced by political and media elites from across the spectrum as something sinister, violent, and dangerous.
Zohran Mamdani’s campaign represented a struggle for basic dignity and an affirmation of democratic potential. It was ceaselessly denounced by political and media elites from across the spectrum as something sinister, violent, and dangerous.
I disagree completely, I think Zohran’s victory is a key example of left unity despite all efforts to drive a wedge or schism.
With our current Overton window, the word“bipartisan” means a coalition between conservatives (Democrats) and fascists (Republicans). So, yeah, it is a bipartisan meltdown, because neither party really represents Zohran’s base (or most Americans).
Democrats in office, state and federal, overwhelmingly support Mamdani, even Jeffries, and the exceptions make the rule.
They begrudgingly supported him once it became clear that he was going to win. They never wanted to support him, they are only doing it to save face. How long did it take Jeffries to endorse him?
Fuck if I know, or care, feel free to go count the days.
We here on the left don’t worship our politicians so it may surprise you to learn we’re not heartbroken about Jeffries or Schumer saying some shit we didn’t like.
Yes, I know that you don’t care about data that does’t fit your obviously bullshit narrative. That’s like… your whole thing.
“Data that does’t fit your obviously bullshit narrative” being the number of days it took a single DNC politician to endorse Zohran Mamdani? Man, what a hill to die on.
Who is dying on a hill? I’m just pointing out that I know you don’t care about data when you find it inconvenient. Data like:
“They” this “they” that, is this also the faceless them who own the banks lol? The vast majority, everyone minus a rounding error, endorsed Mamdani and were excited by his victory in the DNC. We’re lucky to have him, like a second Bernie Sanders but not even Bernie runs on the DNC ticket outside of presidential primaries we invite him to participate in.
That is a thought. I was told that even if Mamdani doesmt really acheieve anything, merely the fact that he was elected on a socialist platform was supposed to serve as proof that socialists are viable to run. The thought made me happy, but now im not so sure. As you state, neither side is really represents what people actually want, and as such anyone like mamdani would have to run under another party, because the democrats would never allow him to run. They did everything short of assassinating bernie to ensure he didnt win, i can only assume the DNC has been bought out and is now actively attempting to hinder America just like the republicans, and the entire debate is just a distraction while the two parties collude to make things worse for everyone. But third party is impossible to win in FPTP. So… we’re still screwed, no? Its nice that we can get him in on a local level, but until we dismantle the entire DNC I don’t see us making any progress since they will actively hinder him and American interests.
Well said.
Yeah, the US never really stopped McCarthyism. Anyone that is even remotely left politically is to be stymied and squashed.
Sure, depending on who you mean by “left.” Folks like Schumer and Jefferies, however, would certainly need to be excluded for the “unity” part to make sense.
Jeffries endorsed Mamdani before election day.
Technically yes, and what a ringing endorsement it was
“As with any Mayor, there will be areas of agreement and areas of principled disagreement. Yet, the stakes are existential,”
When asked later if Mamdani is the future of the party
“No, I think the future of the Democratic Party is going to fall, as far as we’re concerned, relative to the House Democratic Caucus and members who are doing great work all across the country,”
Two weeks before the election, four months after the primary. Too little too late.
Look, if you stand before a hundred people in a room and two of them disavow you and then people started publishing stories that the entire room was against you: do you think that would be a fair portrayal? Or do you think it’s just people trying to divide the room into camps?
So we’re doing the bad apples thing now? We know who the leaders of the Democratic Party in New York and nationwide are and many of them either waited for months or just straight up didn’t endorse the literal primary winner, who by all means everyone should endorse from day one. If it was a leftist refusing to endorse, I don’t know, Newsom they’d all be up in arms about leftist division and purity testing. I don’t give a shit what random Democratic official #3011 said about Mamdani; the people running the show showed exactly zero unity with the Mamdani and the left.
They would not all be up in arms, just a couple of individuals. Whoever wins the primary is the DNC and whoever loses is not, until the DNC in practice no longer exists.
I swear to god, democrats will try literally everything else before endorsing a good candidate with popular policies.
What, touring with the war criminal Dick Chaney isn’t gonna win voters?
“No you don’t get it, he did it in the last possible minute, that means he always supported him.”