Zohran Mamdani...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are governments grocery stores supposed to work logistically?

I heard Mamdani on a podcast. He is proposing one grocery store in each borough to see if this might work to help bring down the cost of groceries if profit can be removed as a prerequisite. He is proposing this as an experiment to see if it's workable. His willingness to try new ideas is what excites me the most about him.

Does he have business experience?
Where is his wealth from?

[Anonymous]

I'm just glad Zohran is proving again you do not need to be a Zionist to win elections in this country. Hopefully, this becomes the norm rather than the exception.

[Anonymous]

I think what this primary demonstrates is that the working and middle class - the majority of Americans - are completely up for grabs for both parties. The GOP is all in with the oligarchs and Christian conservatives. Democrats have been all in with progressives - LatinX, Terfs, Trans, CIS whatever, DEI, ACAB, Gaza, masks, and so on.

Normal people reject both. And the party that reaches people on everyday issues - health care, inflation, housing/rent, safe schools, the environment, enormous income disparities, corrupt politicians, and even food deserts - is the party that wins. It seems that Mamdani is hitting that space - really focused on everyday issues for people in NYC that aren't earning seven figures. I do think if the AOC/Sanders part of the Democratic party really focuses on kitchen table issues, they'll do very well nationally.

But if they get lost in the social issues that progressives are all about, Democrats will continue to lose. I get that the NYPD has its issues. But if Mamdani is going to neuter them with "violence interruptors" and "social workers" that lead to an increase in violent crime, it kills Democrats nationally. NYC is a big stage. If Mamdani get this wrong, it'll have national repercussions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think what this primary demonstrates is that the working and middle class - the majority of Americans - are completely up for grabs for both parties. The GOP is all in with the oligarchs and Christian conservatives. Democrats have been all in with progressives - LatinX, Terfs, Trans, CIS whatever, DEI, ACAB, Gaza, masks, and so on.

Normal people reject both. And the party that reaches people on everyday issues - health care, inflation, housing/rent, safe schools, the environment, enormous income disparities, corrupt politicians, and even food deserts - is the party that wins. It seems that Mamdani is hitting that space - really focused on everyday issues for people in NYC that aren't earning seven figures. I do think if the AOC/Sanders part of the Democratic party really focuses on kitchen table issues, they'll do very well nationally.

But if they get lost in the social issues that progressives are all about, Democrats will continue to lose. I get that the NYPD has its issues. But if Mamdani is going to neuter them with "violence interruptors" and "social workers" that lead to an increase in violent crime, it kills Democrats nationally. NYC is a big stage. If Mamdani get this wrong, it'll have national repercussions.

I don't think you understand what progressivism is really about, because the performative identity politics are what the establishment democrats offer because they can't offer real solutions because they are beholden to their corporate donors. Mamdani is a real progressive, and his policies appeal to every day people, just like Bernie's did. The failures of Trumpism and the status quo offered by mainstream dems have only become sharper. Expect to see more actual progressives winning seats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think what this primary demonstrates is that the working and middle class - the majority of Americans - are completely up for grabs for both parties. The GOP is all in with the oligarchs and Christian conservatives. Democrats have been all in with progressives - LatinX, Terfs, Trans, CIS whatever, DEI, ACAB, Gaza, masks, and so on.

Normal people reject both. And the party that reaches people on everyday issues - health care, inflation, housing/rent, safe schools, the environment, enormous income disparities, corrupt politicians, and even food deserts - is the party that wins. It seems that Mamdani is hitting that space - really focused on everyday issues for people in NYC that aren't earning seven figures. I do think if the AOC/Sanders part of the Democratic party really focuses on kitchen table issues, they'll do very well nationally.

But if they get lost in the social issues that progressives are all about, Democrats will continue to lose. I get that the NYPD has its issues. But if Mamdani is going to neuter them with "violence interruptors" and "social workers" that lead to an increase in violent crime, it kills Democrats nationally. NYC is a big stage. If Mamdani get this wrong, it'll have national repercussions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think what this primary demonstrates is that the working and middle class - the majority of Americans - are completely up for grabs for both parties. The GOP is all in with the oligarchs and Christian conservatives. Democrats have been all in with progressives - LatinX, Terfs, Trans, CIS whatever, DEI, ACAB, Gaza, masks, and so on.

Normal people reject both. And the party that reaches people on everyday issues - health care, inflation, housing/rent, safe schools, the environment, enormous income disparities, corrupt politicians, and even food deserts - is the party that wins. It seems that Mamdani is hitting that space - really focused on everyday issues for people in NYC that aren't earning seven figures. I do think if the AOC/Sanders part of the Democratic party really focuses on kitchen table issues, they'll do very well nationally.

But if they get lost in the social issues that progressives are all about, Democrats will continue to lose. I get that the NYPD has its issues. But if Mamdani is going to neuter them with "violence interruptors" and "social workers" that lead to an increase in violent crime, it kills Democrats nationally. NYC is a big stage. If Mamdani get this wrong, it'll have national repercussions.

And if he succeeds? The party will throw it's weight behind progressives right? Right?

[Anonymous]

I don’t think Israel/Palestine was the primary issue in this race, nor would you expect it to be, since New York City is in neither of those countries. Both right-wing Jews and left-wing pro-Palestinians tried to turn this into a referendum on Zionism, but wasn’t he mostly just running on… making the city affordable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think what this primary demonstrates is that the working and middle class - the majority of Americans - are completely up for grabs for both parties. The GOP is all in with the oligarchs and Christian conservatives. Democrats have been all in with progressives - LatinX, Terfs, Trans, CIS whatever, DEI, ACAB, Gaza, masks, and so on.

Normal people reject both. And the party that reaches people on everyday issues - health care, inflation, housing/rent, safe schools, the environment, enormous income disparities, corrupt politicians, and even food deserts - is the party that wins. It seems that Mamdani is hitting that space - really focused on everyday issues for people in NYC that aren't earning seven figures. I do think if the AOC/Sanders part of the Democratic party really focuses on kitchen table issues, they'll do very well nationally.

But if they get lost in the social issues that progressives are all about, Democrats will continue to lose. I get that the NYPD has its issues. But if Mamdani is going to neuter them with "violence interruptors" and "social workers" that lead to an increase in violent crime, it kills Democrats nationally. NYC is a big stage. If Mamdani get this wrong, it'll have national repercussions.

The working class and certainly the lower class most definitely did not vote for this socialist in a majority. At all.
He won the election with white liberal elites:

Yes, the mayoral hopeful’s campaign has masterfully mobilized an energetic base. But the “unprecedented coalition” in question are not made up of the paycheck-to-paycheck New Yorkers that he wants us to believe.

The electoral map doesn’t just fail to reflect his working-class coalition – it flips it. It shows a victory carried by the very neighborhoods his story skips over.

New Yorkers in areas where the median income is above $117,600 backed Mr. Mamdani by 13 points. Middle-income precincts followed right behind. Lower-income New Yorkers? They broke just as hard for Cuomo instead.

Whiter, wealthier, more ideologically driven New Yorkers are certainly overrepresented in this primary. Take Flatbush and East Flatbush – two neighborhoods situated together with comparable populations. Gentrified Flatbush opted for Mamdani by 16 points, versus the Caribbean-dominated East Flatbush, which preferred Cuomo by 37 points.

The difference? About 5,000 more Flatbush voters participated in the primary. Mr. Mamdani’s win simply reflects a truism about primaries: Affluent ideologues appear in droves until the general election resets the balance.

When I broke down Mamdani’s donor base by ZIP code using NYC Campaign Finance Board data, I found his campaign is no exception.

The same affluent ZIP codes with the highest large-dollar donor participation significantly overlap with those driving Mamdani’s “grassroots” small donor base – the very donors he claims represent the city’s working class.

https://www.news-journal.com/zohran-mamdani-working-class-mayor-for-upper-class-voters/article_4f37464b-557d-5720-825e-723fe6bb22c8.html

[Anonymous]

Trump is coming absolutely unglued over this. I’d love to get him out of office, but watching him suffer is kind of fun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what this primary demonstrates is that the working and middle class - the majority of Americans - are completely up for grabs for both parties. The GOP is all in with the oligarchs and Christian conservatives. Democrats have been all in with progressives - LatinX, Terfs, Trans, CIS whatever, DEI, ACAB, Gaza, masks, and so on.

Normal people reject both. And the party that reaches people on everyday issues - health care, inflation, housing/rent, safe schools, the environment, enormous income disparities, corrupt politicians, and even food deserts - is the party that wins. It seems that Mamdani is hitting that space - really focused on everyday issues for people in NYC that aren't earning seven figures. I do think if the AOC/Sanders part of the Democratic party really focuses on kitchen table issues, they'll do very well nationally.

But if they get lost in the social issues that progressives are all about, Democrats will continue to lose. I get that the NYPD has its issues. But if Mamdani is going to neuter them with "violence interruptors" and "social workers" that lead to an increase in violent crime, it kills Democrats nationally. NYC is a big stage. If Mamdani get this wrong, it'll have national repercussions.

The working class and certainly the lower class most definitely did not vote for this socialist in a majority. At all.
He won the election with white liberal elites:

Yes, the mayoral hopeful’s campaign has masterfully mobilized an energetic base. But the “unprecedented coalition” in question are not made up of the paycheck-to-paycheck New Yorkers that he wants us to believe.

The electoral map doesn’t just fail to reflect his working-class coalition – it flips it. It shows a victory carried by the very neighborhoods his story skips over.

New Yorkers in areas where the median income is above $117,600 backed Mr. Mamdani by 13 points. Middle-income precincts followed right behind. Lower-income New Yorkers? They broke just as hard for Cuomo instead.

Whiter, wealthier, more ideologically driven New Yorkers are certainly overrepresented in this primary. Take Flatbush and East Flatbush – two neighborhoods situated together with comparable populations. Gentrified Flatbush opted for Mamdani by 16 points, versus the Caribbean-dominated East Flatbush, which preferred Cuomo by 37 points.

The difference? About 5,000 more Flatbush voters participated in the primary. Mr. Mamdani’s win simply reflects a truism about primaries: Affluent ideologues appear in droves until the general election resets the balance.

When I broke down Mamdani’s donor base by ZIP code using NYC Campaign Finance Board data, I found his campaign is no exception.

The same affluent ZIP codes with the highest large-dollar donor participation significantly overlap with those driving Mamdani’s “grassroots” small donor base – the very donors he claims represent the city’s working class.

https://www.news-journal.com/zohran-mamdani-working-class-mayor-for-upper-class-voters/article_4f37464b-557d-5720-825e-723fe6bb22c8.html

“How New Yorkers voted: Mr. Mamdani’s success was built on a novel coalition of young, progressive, Latino and South Asian voters rooted in Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens.”

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/06/25/nyregion/zohran-mamdani-nyc-mayor-election

He activated young progressives, which is something that the current crop of near republican democrats fail to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are governments grocery stores supposed to work logistically?

I heard Mamdani on a podcast. He is proposing one grocery store in each borough to see if this might work to help bring down the cost of groceries if profit can be removed as a prerequisite. He is proposing this as an experiment to see if it's workable. His willingness to try new ideas is what excites me the most about him.

Does he have business experience?
Where is his wealth from?

What scares you about 4 grocery stores as an experiment to see if they help improve nutritional access/grocery prices in food desserts? Why does the source of his wealth or his background matter at all? Rich businessmen are also encouraged to test out new ideas, but hopefully they realize not all great ideas come from those already established.

[Anonymous]

It seems he unapologetically opposes ethnic cleansing and isn't willing to lie about it just because opponents can twist it to look like antisemitism to defeat him. Sounds like a pure moral stand, which is a positive character trait extremely rare in politicians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what this primary demonstrates is that the working and middle class - the majority of Americans - are completely up for grabs for both parties. The GOP is all in with the oligarchs and Christian conservatives. Democrats have been all in with progressives - LatinX, Terfs, Trans, CIS whatever, DEI, ACAB, Gaza, masks, and so on.

Normal people reject both. And the party that reaches people on everyday issues - health care, inflation, housing/rent, safe schools, the environment, enormous income disparities, corrupt politicians, and even food deserts - is the party that wins. It seems that Mamdani is hitting that space - really focused on everyday issues for people in NYC that aren't earning seven figures. I do think if the AOC/Sanders part of the Democratic party really focuses on kitchen table issues, they'll do very well nationally.

But if they get lost in the social issues that progressives are all about, Democrats will continue to lose. I get that the NYPD has its issues. But if Mamdani is going to neuter them with "violence interruptors" and "social workers" that lead to an increase in violent crime, it kills Democrats nationally. NYC is a big stage. If Mamdani get this wrong, it'll have national repercussions.

I don't think you understand what progressivism is really about, because the performative identity politics are what the establishment democrats offer because they can't offer real solutions because they are beholden to their corporate donors. Mamdani is a real progressive, and his policies appeal to every day people, just like Bernie's did. The failures of Trumpism and the status quo offered by mainstream dems have only become sharper. Expect to see more actual progressives winning seats.

I agree. When people trash progressives/liberals/the left/socialists, they really do not understand the meaning of the terms. A progressive is someone forward looking who wants to try new ideas to make progress. A liberal is someone who is open minded. "the left" just referred to which side of a parliament (I forget which country) officials sat in associated with a more socialist political party, and socialists in which some (not all) goods and services are provided by the state (social security is great- and very popular - example of a socialist program).

None of these concepts are ones that I see any issues with.

Allowing trans athletes to compete in their non birth gender sports or mastering a long list of new vocabulary to talk about a person's gender or sexual identity are simply not relevant to the discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems he unapologetically opposes ethnic cleansing and isn't willing to lie about it just because opponents can twist it to look like antisemitism to defeat him. Sounds like a pure moral stand, which is a positive character trait extremely rare in politicians.

"Globalize the intifada!!!"
And, you thinnk he opposes ethnic cleansing. Ha.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dcum...where the people making $1M per year are "middle class" and just need some more billionaire money to make sure the poor get their free food. The height of generosity

Works in Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries: pay 65% of the population to not work, do nothing, and keep voting for them.

Sounds good to me