There is a hunger for bold, transformative politics in the United States right now. Zohran Mamdani shows how the Left can run on a principled, disciplined message that speaks to voters’ lived concerns — and win.
What kind of question is that? It should be extremely obvious that I think he should’ve ignored or rejected the DSA’s endorsement. Endorsements go both ways. By openly accepting their endorsement, he’s basically saying that he’s proud of them and what they do. Do you not find this at all concerning considering what the DSA has done and stood for in recent years? Do you think it’s not at least worth criticizing him over this? Just because he’s better than Cuomo for not being a sex pest and better than Adams for not being blatantly corrupt and accepting bribes, that doesn’t mean he’s now absolved from receiving criticism. Saying “but there’s worse” doesn’t in any way justify, excuse, or negate this endorsement. If accepting an endorsement by a billionaire funded right wing group or a foreign funded lobbyist group is problematic, then this should be as well.
There, I’ve addressed your point, can you finally address mine?
Ok, so that’s not happening. What do you think the consequences of that should be? Do you want him out of office? Or just for people to say hey, that’s bad! And then go about our business? Should we have withheld votes over that one thing or not?
Your questions? Oh I don’t care about the DSA thing at all. I’m more concerned with where his actual focus lies as a local mayor, not who endorsed him and the optics of endorsements. I don’t know enough about the DSA or any of the stuff that are bothering you so much to make it a wedge issue. I’m more curious as to what you hope to accomplish by your comments. One of the things the right does better than the left is maintaining party cohesion, so it always intrigues me when people self sabotage incremental moves in the right direction.
I’m arguing with you right now. If you endorsed me, I’d accept it. I’d take your money and use it for whatever I wanted. I’d take your endorsement to mean you agree with my views, regardless of what your words say. Or are you claiming some quid pro quo we should be worried about? Because that’s usually the actual concern when talking about big money donors in politics.
What kind of question is that? It should be extremely obvious that I think he should’ve ignored or rejected the DSA’s endorsement. Endorsements go both ways. By openly accepting their endorsement, he’s basically saying that he’s proud of them and what they do. Do you not find this at all concerning considering what the DSA has done and stood for in recent years? Do you think it’s not at least worth criticizing him over this? Just because he’s better than Cuomo for not being a sex pest and better than Adams for not being blatantly corrupt and accepting bribes, that doesn’t mean he’s now absolved from receiving criticism. Saying “but there’s worse” doesn’t in any way justify, excuse, or negate this endorsement. If accepting an endorsement by a billionaire funded right wing group or a foreign funded lobbyist group is problematic, then this should be as well.
There, I’ve addressed your point, can you finally address mine?
Ok, so that’s not happening. What do you think the consequences of that should be? Do you want him out of office? Or just for people to say hey, that’s bad! And then go about our business? Should we have withheld votes over that one thing or not?
Your questions? Oh I don’t care about the DSA thing at all. I’m more concerned with where his actual focus lies as a local mayor, not who endorsed him and the optics of endorsements. I don’t know enough about the DSA or any of the stuff that are bothering you so much to make it a wedge issue. I’m more curious as to what you hope to accomplish by your comments. One of the things the right does better than the left is maintaining party cohesion, so it always intrigues me when people self sabotage incremental moves in the right direction.
I’m arguing with you right now. If you endorsed me, I’d accept it. I’d take your money and use it for whatever I wanted. I’d take your endorsement to mean you agree with my views, regardless of what your words say. Or are you claiming some quid pro quo we should be worried about? Because that’s usually the actual concern when talking about big money donors in politics.