Access to this page has been denied
thehill.com
px-captcha

Zohran Mamdani has won the race for New York City mayor, according to Decision Desk HQ, ushering in a new era of progressive politics in the city and reigniting the debate over the Democratic Party’s future.

Mamdani, a 34-year-old democratic socialist, is poised to become the first millennial and first Muslim to lead New York City, after a campaign that pulled off one of the most stunning political upsets in recent memory. He defeated former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who mounted a long-shot independent bid after losing to Mamdani in the Democratic primary, and Republican Curtis Sliwa in his bid to succeed Mayor Eric Adams.

Mamdani focused heavily on affordability, pledging to freeze rent, establish city-owned grocery stores and make buses free for riders. He quickly became a progressive icon as well as a polarizing figure within the party over his positions, so much so that it divided prominent New York Democratic leadership over whether to endorse him.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
    721·
    12 hours ago

    Almost as soon as Mamdani won the primary, the DNC chair did a PBS interview talking about the important part was the platform Mamdani ran on…

    And Martin only waited till after the primary, because he legit believes a party shouldn’t be biased. But he ran Minnesota for a decade, and under his watch they went from purple to progressive as fuck.

    The only way we lose, is if people pre-emptively give up on the party and don’t vote in the primary. So there’s going to be a lot of noise trying to convince people not to trust the new party

    • spaduf@slrpnk.net
      12·
      3 hours ago

      Martin only waited till after the primary, because he legit believes a party shouldn’t be biased. But he ran Minnesota for a decade, and under his watch they went from purple to progressive as fuck.

      To be correct. Ken Martin hates DSA and socialists. Most of his time in Minnesota was spent purging DSA members from the party. Minnesota went left in spite of him.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
        191·
        12 hours ago

        We got like 30 months till presidential primaries, and the billionaires are not going to talk about how they lost control of the DNC on the media networks they bought for propaganda…

        Ignorance is the natural state, everyone is ignorant of everything until they learn it.

        But it’s not gonna be a valid excuse for much longer.

        But regardless of people’s opinion of the DNC, Martin is going to keep throwing money back at state parties, which is going to keep translating to wins downballot. And he’s not gonna stop a progressive from getting the presidential nomination.

    • Deceptichum@quokk.auEnglish
      48·
      10 hours ago

      You have such a hard-on for Ken, despite the fact that he’s a typical centrist lib who in his own words is happy to continue taking money from “good billionaires”.

      I cant wait for the day you realise what he actually is and stop spreading the propaganda.

      • MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
        24·
        9 hours ago

        How about we implement a progressive income tax, no loopholes, instead of fixating on an arbitrary number like fucking dumbasses? How much money CAN one have from which you’d still take money?

        Drop the fucking buzzwords. This isn’t a game.

        • Deceptichum@quokk.auEnglish
          42·
          9 hours ago

          Oh hey it’s this troll again. Please you never answered the last time you made this bogus claim - What are these buzzwords you keep imaging.

          This has nothing to do with taxation, the issue is money in politics.

          Please before bothering me any more on this site, take the time to actually read what has been said you’ve now made this ridiculous completely unrelated statement twice now.

          • MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
            25·
            8 hours ago

            Lol, what’s a greater sign of one’s insecurity in their own argument than instantly labeling “troll”. Pathetic.

            Please you never answered the last time you made this bogus claim

            Is that how language works? One’s own claim requires an answer? I thought answers followed questions. What do you even think is “bogus”. Fucking income tax?

            What are these buzzwords you keep imaging.

            “Billionaire”. It’s fucking arbitrary and it removes the focus from where it should be. “Centrist lib”, you sound like a Trumper for fuck’s sake.

            This has nothing to do with taxation, the issue is money in politics.

            Oh and ONLY billionaires can put money in politics? Someone with a hundred million, you wouldn’t have a problem with that? What is your cutoff? A lot of rich people put money in politics precisely so they can get tax breaks. So no, they’re not unrelated. And every time you allow a Republican to come to power over the “centrist lib”, you do the super rich a massive favor.

            Please before bothering me any more on this site, take the time to actually read what has been said you’ve now made this ridiculous completely unrelated statement twice now.

            More pathetic posturing to obscure your weak argument. That’s all this is. It’s not my fault you’re too goddamn stupid to understand either why they put money in politics nor how you actually help them.

    • MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
      411·
      11 hours ago

      There’s no “new party”. Democrats won in Virginia by being centrist. Not every part of the country is exactly the same.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
        22·
        3 hours ago

        Not every part of the country is exactly the same.

        Almost like not every part of the party is exactly the same?

        The “new” part is being nonbiased instead of ridiculously biased.

        If you’re confused and something sounds like it doesn’t make sense, ask questions instead of making assumptions

        • MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
          23·
          2 hours ago

          Almost like not every part of the party is exactly the same?

          That supports my point, it doesn’t dispute it.

          The “new” part is being nonbiased instead of ridiculously biased.

          What the fuck does that mean? Non-biased, is that a joke? People, trying to divide the party to help Republicans win, are obviously biased. I on the other hand accept both wins in NYC and Virginia while you accept only NYC.

          If you’re confused and something sounds like it doesn’t make sense, ask questions instead of making assumptions

          I didn’t express confusion or uncertainty. This is a pathetic argument tactic that intentionally avoids the topic at hand.

          Stop trying to divide the party. That’s how you uncompromising ideologues gave us a second Trump presidency.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            2 hours ago

            I think the problem is you don’t understand what the DNC is…

            If you chill out and try to have a civil conversation, I can help

      • SailorFuzz@lemmy.world
        202·
        11 hours ago

        But they won. Because the alternative was a literal maga crazy person who doesn’t think prejudice against LGBT people is discriminatory.

        Now, you can be unhappy that it wasn’t some mystical ultra progressive (that wasn’t even running in the race)… or you can be happy that at least the needle didn’t shift even further right. Now that’s not to say “Vote Blue NMW”, but it will be easier to field progressives in the future from Spanberger’s position, than from Winsome’s. And maybe next time, the magical lefty messiah Lisan al Gaib will be running and the choice will be between them vs the centrist democrat, instead of a centrist democrat vs a literal smoothbrained maga dummy.

        • MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
          32·
          9 hours ago

          But they won.

          I certainly didn’t dispute that. Both won by running races that best appealed the majority of voters in their electoral areas. People here are somehow mad that we got the governorship of Virginia? The confirmation bias is ridiculous.

          Because the alternative was a literal maga crazy person who doesn’t think prejudice against LGBT people is discriminatory.

          Yeah, welcome to much of America that isn’t NYC, a major urban metropolis. And Mamdani still had decent opposition from a sex offender. Gonna ignore that? If you try, you could downplay his victory as much as hers but why would you? They’re both wins. Winning shouldn’t divide us. Also, it’s bit easier for a Democrat to win the mayoralty of NYC than it is the governorship of purple Virginia.

          Now, you can be unhappy that it wasn’t some mystical ultra progressive (that wasn’t even running in the race)… or you can be happy that at least the needle didn’t shift even further right.

          I’m happy in either case. All I care about is a pragmatic approach that moves society in the way I most agree with. Allowing Donald Trump to come to power doesn’t qualify.

          • Deceptichum@quokk.auEnglish
            44·
            10 hours ago

            Not to say there isn’t, because we’ve seen that doing so is how you get people like Trump and voter apathy.