• vxx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    With the current political climate USA is in, it might weaken him to get endorsements from the establishment.

    Their masks are coming off. Voting in line with republicans and being vocal against anything progressive.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I was thinking the other day after NPR mentioned Elon’s recent spat that he could fund other candidates in mid terms. If he endorsed Democrats that might do more harm than good lol.

  • deddit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    Okay, just hear me out for a second… I completely agree they should endorse him, but rather than just saying they are irreverent (though this may actually be the case) I would like to know in clear and concise terms WHY they are waiting/failing to endorse the man whom was chosen by the people. I think knowing why they won’t endorse him is very relevant to the discussion. Eith

    TLDR; their silence is very telling.

    • njm1314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I don’t know about the rest of them, though I certainly have my suspicions, but with gillibrand it’s very clearly just racism. That interview she gave was extremely telling.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      They’ve given interviews. According to them, Mamdani hasn’t yet proven his viability among the general population, he only won a primary where 15% of the DNC participated with a plurality vote of 43%. Furthermore, some of them represent districts that hardlined against Mamdani such as neighborhoods in the southeastern part of Brooklyn. Mamdani won Brooklyn overall but the difference between neighborhoods he won and lost were very stark.

      I agree with you, though, that they should endorse Mamdani. Any concerns about his type of socialism can be easily quelled with Mamdani’s clear opposition to “communist countries”.

      Not endorsing Mamdani is just asking to split the vote and give Republicans the chance to fuck everything up.

      • troglodytis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        23 minutes ago

        That kind of reasoning makes sense to not endorse him in a run off.

        But in the general election? He’s got your party’s nomination, so back your party. Your Cuomo boy got primaried, get over it. (Edit: the ‘your’ in this sentence applies to the party members listed in the OP, not the commenter and/or OP)

        This is just money talking. Rich people don’t like the ones that look like they won’t bend to them. Hopefully he continues to not.

        Also, this is yet another reason I don’t associate with political parties. Super not a fan of them. It’s the system we got, and I do vote with the dual party power structure in mind, but you’ll never see me signed up in one.

      • ReiRose@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I don’t like ‘viability among gen pop’. It’s like assessing his electability. Doesn’t matter, he was chosen in a democratic primary vote. He’s the democratic candidate for mayor. If they expect us to fall in line and vote blue, they need to fall in line and endorse blue.

        Rich fucks

        • Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          “electability” was always a sham. It is exclusively used by millionaire news pundits and NYT writers to tell primary voters not to vote for the candidate with the policy that immediately improves the material conditions of the most people because of an imaginary cohort of “centrists” and “moderate republicans” who are terrified of anything good like free healthcare, child care, college, rent-control, and taxes on billionaires, but will totally vote for the version of those policies that will help nobody.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          I agree but you have to focus on outcomes. Does endorsing him help or harm him? Does endorsing him help or harm themselves? The answer to these questions might very well be “I don’t know”.

          If some general polls shine a big beautiful light on Mamdani being the best possible candidate to defeat the Republican nominee, then hopefully that is more than enough reason for these few Democrats to fall in line behind him. If he polls at like 25%, it’s going to start being time to look at other options.

      • pretzelz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Just looked up the bright blue square on Brooklyn - it’s Borough Park: “home to one of the largest Orthodox Jewish communities outside Israel, with one of the largest concentrations of Jews in the United States”

        Hmm! I don’t think it’s his policies they are against…

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Yeah it should come as no surprise, he’s very openly pro-palestine and during the primaries the media framed a perfect picture of Mamdani for Palestine and Cuomo for Israel.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Ilhan Omar, Bernie Sanders, Rashida Tlaib, Summer Lee, AOC (though she’s compromised with the party leadership on Israel’s genocide to an abhorrent degree nonetheless), Ayanna Presley, Cory Bush (successfully primaried over it) and Jamaal Bowman (ditto), and everyone else not listed here.

        They’re a small minority for sure, but they exist and pretending otherwise just feeds into the manipulative establishment “electability” narrative that they use to poison the public against progressive candidates.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I find it incredibly ironic and enlightening that the one Jewish congressperson I can name off the top of my head is on this list.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 hours ago

          For example, there is a New York state congress versus the US Federal Congress, they probably meant a distinction there because obviously state congressmen won’t get very much PAC money.

    • Botunda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 hours ago

      And that right there is the the key! Is Sirius about serving their corporate masters and their deep pockets

  • LeadersAtWork@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    8 hours ago

    This is one of those situations where not certifying the guy and just getting out of the way is an absolutely terrible idea if you enjoy your position. He got young voters out. The same people who are pretty decent at getting out and organizing for protests and with the way things are going these fish may grow teeth. Maybe not sharks, though no one messes with piranhas all the same.

    • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      18-25 has always, and will always be, the demographic with the lowest voter turnout. By a significant margin. Nearly every election, people seem to get this idea that “This time it will be different! The youth are really fired up this time! It’s important, so I’m sure they’ll turn out!” And then the election happens and they never even break 50%.

      It’s not a messaging problem, or an outreach problem. There is essentially nothing that can change it. The issue is, and say it with me; 18-25 has always, and will always be, the demographic with the lowest voter turnout.

  • Godric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Did those politicians say “vote blue no matter who” or was that people online in an effort to avoid gestures broadly?

    Genuine question, they’ve always been massive disappointments who would benefit from that.

    • PunnyName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      I specifically said “vote blue no matter who”, because while yes, there are Establishment Democrats that exist, Extermination Republicans are quite objectively fucking worse.

      Because if Fascist 47 wasn’t in office, we could at least try to get shit done, instead of putting out 17+ daily fires.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          Well for starters we haven’t had a Democrat senate supermajority without caucus since 1979, we haven’t even given them 50 since 2012-2013, and now everything is going to shit, so…

        • PunnyName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Fascist 47 hasn’t been the president that long, and anyone with a brain knew he would tear this country down.

          • ReiRose@lemmy.world
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 hours ago

            How was he able to do that? How does he have so much more power than democratic presidents? Genuine question bc all my brain says is that the dem potus’ don’t want change. 45/47 was able to really rock the boat the wrong way, why couldn’t 46 make this much change in the other direction? 44?..

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              50 minutes ago

              How was he able to do that? How does he have so much more power than democratic presidents?

              Dems and the Dem base run on the idea of an actual government with laws and standards. Dems sometimes violate those laws, but with plausible deniability in the vein of lawyers.

              The GOP and the GOP base runs on the idea that hurting people is the highest good, and that laws are just a means to an end. They used to have more of the “lawyerly plausible deniability” strain about them, but Trump and his ghoulish following have dispensed with that, as they’re convinced that laws are a secret liberal plot to stop America from becoming a White Man’s Country once again.

              Basically, the GOP doesn’t give a fuck about all the rules the Dems follow, and the GOP base won’t electorally punish them for it, because the GOP base is made of fascists.

            • Alaik@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Because half the shit he’s doing is illegal and 46 would not break the law so fragrantly and repeatedly, and when shot down he listened to the courts.

              Republicans have control of every branch.

        • Soulg@ani.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 hours ago

          You can’t possibly be equating the current situations with anything in the past

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Anyone who has ever used that phrase un-ironically is politically tone deaf, or a Republican agent. I get the sentiment, and even agree with it, but it doesn’t communicate what people who use it think it does. The kind of people who use that phrase are the ones I blame most for gestures broadly.

  • blargh513@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Why the fuck is schumer still in office?! Hes the very definition of a dickless, useless democrat. Fuck that guy, just get lost useless boomer, let someone who gives a shit take the seat.

      • ReiRose@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Fuck his donors. He should run with the money and endorse Mamdani if he’s such a good person

        • ViatorOmnium@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Who said anything about good person? He made it to lead senator of an unholy big tent coalition of a party. Of course he is a spinless butt kisser. Which is still better than a hypocritical backstabber.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 hours ago

      He’s WORSE than useless. Not only is he a Manchin level shill for fossil fuel interests, he’s said that his job is to “keep the left Pro Israel”, a statement so blatant that he’d call out anyone ascribing that sentiment to him for using the antisemitic “dual loyalty” trope.

      There’s literally REPUBLICANS in Congress right now that are less awful than he is! Imagine that: the Senate leader of what the Dem leadership pretends to be the Left being worse than some actual fascists 🤬

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        53 minutes ago

        There’s literally REPUBLICANS in Congress right now that are less awful than he is!

        You had me til here.

      • ReiRose@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Senators Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Susan Collins of Maine, and Rand Paul of Kentucky voted against the BBB, for example

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Though tbf, Paul is such an ancap shithead that his objection is that it doesn’t kill ENOUGH poor people, women, minorities, and combinations of more than one of the above.

          That’s not how HE puts it, of course, but he’s smart enough to have gotten a doctorate and has been in politics more than long enough to recognize social mass murder and codified bigotry when he sees it.

          • Sconrad122@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 hour ago

            And Thom was the only person in the world who voted for Ted Cruz’ amendment to the BBB that would have outlawed state-level AI regulation. And Susan Collins played dumb as bricks to justify not voting for justice in Trump’s impeachment. Schumer is Cheney level heinous (already a high bar). These fuckers are just broken clocks

    • lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      11 hours ago

      AOC will probably primary him. Schumer is at something like a 2 decade low in approval while AOC polls much higher state-wide.

  • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Adams is still their pick, even if he’s (I). They just put Cuomo up under (D) to try to beat the leftist since Adams is now shamed.

    Trust me, the Dem establishment is just fine with Adams as mayor of NYC.