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.
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.
Who is talking about the banks? WTF are you on about?
I think you missed this part again:
It’s almost like you don’t like engaging with data that doesn’t fit your narrative. Weird, I wonder where I heard that before.
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.