• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cuomo stays in NYC mayor’s race despite losing the Democratic primary to Mamdani

Surrealistik said:
Speaking of:

newrepublic.com

Centrist Democrats Are the Actual Traitors to Their Party

While progressives often get accused of undermining the Democratic Party, the evidence shows that it’s the moderate wing that most often violates the “Vote Blue No Matter Who” principle.
newrepublic.com newrepublic.com
Click to expand...

Good article.

Dean Phillips, the former congressman who challenged President Biden for the Democratic nomination last year, said he ultimately believed there was no room in the party for “socialists” like Mamdani (who is a democratic socialist, specifically).
Click to expand...

That doesn't matter, because how socialism is imposed doesn't change the way it works and it always works like shit.

These skeptics and naysayers will likely have little effect on the actual general election results come November. Mamdani, who earned more votes than any candidate has ever earned in the history of New York City Democratic primaries, has significantly higher favorability ratings among voters than any of his critics. But the failure of so many centrist Democrats to rally around the Democratic nominee in a race to lead the biggest and most culturally dominant city in America does effectively illustrate an underrecognized and often misrepresented dynamic in Democratic politics: that it is actually the party’s centrist establishment, not its progressive wing, that’s most likely to violate the maxim of “Vote Blue No Matter Who.”
Click to expand...

Excellent point, and I'm a bit surprised they won't endorse him. It's like they're admitting that their ideology is scary.

As Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez put it to a NY1 reporter: “I, as a Democrat, support the Democratic nominee. It’s disappointing to see how people want the party to rally behind the nominee when that nominee is them—and then that principle gets thrown out the window when the nominee is someone they don’t like.”
Click to expand...

No, when it's someone too far left.
 
aociswundumho said:
That doesn't matter, because how socialism is imposed doesn't change the way it works and it always works like shit
Click to expand...
Most of the most developed, rich, democratic and free countries in the world live under the stripe of policies that Mamdani is pushing. Once again, social democracy is misnomered, and likely deliberately, as democratic socialism.

aociswundumho said:
Excellent point, and I'm a bit surprised they won't endorse him. It's like they're admitting that their ideology is scary.
Click to expand...
It's less about an admission that the 'ideology is scary' and more about the ongoing battle for power and dominance within the party between the neoliberals and the left that has been ongoing since Sanders singlehandedly revived the progressive wing in 2016.

aociswundumho said:
No, when it's someone too far left.
Click to expand...
In otherwords, when it's someone they don't like, just as the article stated.
 
Surrealistik said:
Most of the most developed, rich, democratic and free countries in the world live under the stripe of policies that Mamdani is pushing.
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean they're beneficial.

Surrealistik said:
Once again, social democracy is misnomered, and likely deliberately, as democratic socialism.
Click to expand...

Mamdani is a demsoc, not a socdem. Demsocs want to eliminate capitalism one institution at a time. For example, Mamdani envisions his government-run grocery stores to be highly competitive because his stores won't have to pay the outrageous property taxes the private stores do. Plus, his stores will be non profit which (in his mind) means he can undercut the private stores and keep expanding his government stores. Socdems don't want any part of this idiocy.

Surrealistik said:
It's less about an admission that the 'ideology is scary' and more about the ongoing battle for power and dominance within the party between the neoliberals and the left that has been ongoing since Sanders singlehandedly revived the progressive wing in 2016.
Click to expand...

Only because neoliberal doesn't mean what it used to mean.
 
aociswundumho said:
That doesn't mean they're beneficial.
Click to expand...
When those policies demonstrably contribute to those qualities, they very much do.

aociswundumho said:
Mamdani is a demsoc, not a socdem. Demsocs want to eliminate capitalism one institution at a time. For example, Mamdani envisions his government-run grocery stores to be highly competitive because his stores won't have to pay the outrageous property taxes the private stores do. Plus, his stores will be non profit which (in his mind) means he can undercut the private stores and keep expanding his government stores. Socdems don't want any part of this idiocy.
Click to expand...
He's clearly following the lead of Sanders whose policy playbook about exclusively cleaves to social democracy, yet who prefers the democratic socialist label in order to disarm and discredit the lazy rhetorical dismissal/attack of all things left of Bush as 'socialist' which has been a Republican lynchpin forever.

aociswundumho said:
Only because neoliberal doesn't mean what it used to mean.
Click to expand...
The definition of neoliberalism hasn't changed; its popularity conversely, due to being instrumental to the creation of an existential threat in a strong China hellbent on displacing American hegemony and nearly half a century of real median wage stagnation or declines depending on your measure however has; namely for the worst.
 
Surrealistik said:
The definition of neoliberalism hasn't changed; its popularity conversely, due to being instrumental to the creation of an existential threat in a strong China hellbent on displacing American hegemony
Click to expand...

So you would prefer a weak China with close to a billion people never having the chance to escape abject poverty?
 
aociswundumho said:
So you would prefer a weak China with close to a billion people never having the chance to escape abject poverty?
Click to expand...
I would indeed prefer a weak China that is presently committing at least 2 domestic genocides and snuffing out all political dissent in a panopticon police state that didn't have a real shot at imposing its Orwellian nightmare on the rest of the 7 billion people of the world and counting, yes.
 
aociswundumho said:
So you would prefer a weak China with close to a billion people never having the chance to escape abject poverty?
Click to expand...
That is a good sentiment. Workers in China deserve a good standard of living.
 
ElChupacabra said:
I doubt that, because Sliwa has even less of a shot than any of them. You do have a point about the the Cuomo/Adams factor helping to split the Democratic vote, but I think even with that Sliwa is a long shot.
Click to expand...
I recently saw Sliwa on video for the first time and noticed he was wearing a beret. From what I understand, he wears that beret a lot. IMO, that particular headwear makes him look like a Third World terrorist leader. I take back the good things I said about Sliwa; he’s a clown. If I lived in NYC, I guess I’d hold my nose and vote for Adams to stop the Communist takeover of the Big Apple.

Mark
 
markdc said:
I recently saw Sliwa on video for the first time and noticed he was wearing a beret. From what I understand, he wears that beret a lot. IMO, that particular headwear makes him look like a Third World terrorist leader. I take back the good things I said about Sliwa; he’s a clown. If I lived in NYC, I guess I’d hold my nose and vote for Adams to stop the Communist takeover of the Big Apple.

Mark
Click to expand...
You must not be familiar with Curtis Sliwa then. He wears a red beret because he founded an organization called The Guardian Angels, who served as a community based security group back when NYC had a very high crime rate. Members of this group worked as "security" to try and prevent crime and wore white branded t-shirts and red berets. As for this whole "communist takeover of NYC", that's a load of rubbish and will likely help Mamdani more than hurt him because the issues he's campaigning on have support from a significant part of the public and are not communist policies. I still chuckle at the use of that term as a scare tactic in this day and age.
 
TheDoctorWasIn said:
Cuomo has said that if Mamdani wins, he's going to move to Florida.

One more reason to vote for Mamdani.
Click to expand...

What. He did? That is genuinely insane. Who is this rhetoric supposed to appeal to? The New York secret Republican sore loser set?
 
ElChupacabra said:
You must not be familiar with Curtis Sliwa then. He wears a red beret because he founded an organization called The Guardian Angels, who served as a community based security group back when NYC had a very high crime rate. Members of this group worked as "security" to try and prevent crime and wore white branded t-shirts and red berets. As for this whole "communist takeover of NYC", that's a load of rubbish and will likely help Mamdani more than hurt him because the issues he's campaigning on have support from a significant part of the public and are not communist policies. I still chuckle at the use of that term as a scare tactic in this day and age.
Click to expand...
I know nothing about Sliwa except that he's a Republican.

Mark
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom