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.
I might hazard to guess that some of the down votes are because of the aggressive tone you took, it doesn’t exactly invite a friendly discussion. I appreciate that politics are a charged subject at the best of times, but I think the anger needs to be channelled more effectively, maybe now more than ever. Which is to say that I fully agree with your statement about needing to avoid division.
No, it the content. People in here will downplay VA when both are important wins. I don’t take this cutthroat view, I’m happy to get wins where we can. I’m tire of people here refusing to acknowledge that more than their tactic can work.
Hard disagree, I’ve not seen a single person disagreeing with your points, only with the way you’ve raised them. Nor have I seen anyone express displeasure about the VA results, despite you talking about how ‘they’ are downplaying it.
In the interest of not stoking more argument, I would urge you to take a moment to read and parse the responses you’ve got here, and see if they natch up with what you think people are saying to you.
Good for you, I HAVE seen those things. What was your point?
I have a number of responses that are single word insults, positive “karma” for those. What do you say about that?
I’ve already have had a number of people try to downplay it. Just look the amount of Mamdani posts on Lemmy vs those of VA. On top of that, I’m told she only one there because her opponent was crazy. Diminishing her accomplishment. These people don’t want to admit that a varied approach is necessary. They want their way or nothing.
Yeah, they are. You can choose not to believe me, I don’t care. I know I’m not lying.
I think it’s probably contextual, the single word insults might fit better with the thread they’re in. But here, you’ve waded into a thread on a specific subject to insult and berate people for (supposedly) not being excited enough about a different subject. And then respond to anyone trying to give you feedback by accusing them of not being excited enough about that other subject despite them saying nothing about it.
I think you’re making baseless assumptions rather than admit maybe you were wrong. I’ve been called “delusional” for merely saying the elections prove a varied approach is needed based on locality.
How convenient that you get to make a correlation based on “probably”. You just invented the context to try win some argument? I’d rather be outright insulted.
I’m going to be honest, I have no idea what you’re on about now. You said something happens, I offered a potential theory, you can take it or leave it. Based on this thread alone, I’ve seen you responding aggressively to people entirely unprompted, and accusing them of saying things they haven’t. I’m not sure how much more productive conversation we could have, I’m willing to try, but I think the best shout might be to just draw a line under things there.
They live in a bubble and insult anyone who tries to correct them.