Perhaps an unpopular take, but that one time he called Maduro a dictator was literally on MyCultura, an iHeartRadio podcast network basically for gusanos. Should he have said that shit? No, obviously not.
But also I saying that trash is basically a requirement for getting to speak on the gusano podcast, Laser sights trained on your forehead if you don’t. Unfortunately, that medium is how you reach a lot of Spanish speaking New Yorkers. Anti-communism runs deep and the “freedom of speech” that hogs love to screech about continues to be wholly hypothetical.
He didn’t say it on the podcast, he said it 2 weeks later after the podcast host convinced him Venezuela and Cuba are bad.
“When New York Assembly member Zohran Mamdani finally decided to speak publicly about Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro and Cuban leader Miguel Díaz-Canel, he didn’t do it in a press conference or a statement through his office but on a podcast. He was being interviewed by none other than Emmy Award-winning journalist Jorge Ramos and his daughter, political commentator Paola Ramos”
I wouldn’t be condescending about a podcast I didn’t listen to. He was ambivalent in the interview, dodging the dictator question, and saying he didn’t know enough but that his democratic socialism was different from Maduro’s. Then he followed up afterwards explicitly calling both Maduro and Diaz-Canel dictators. It’s in the article you posted btw
He spoke publicly about them on the podcast (as your quote says), but he didn’t call them dictators on the podcast, as I said.
Quoted below from the linked article, emphasis added by me.
Mamdani, the Democratic mayoral nominee and leading candidate in the race for New York City Hall, has often spoken about housing rights and immigrant justice but stayed cautious when asked about Maduro’s authoritarian rule or Díaz-Canel’s repression in Cuba. During the interview, the duo pressed him on whether he considered them dictators. The initial answer was mild, condemning the repression in both countries but declining to call them “dictators.” However, his campaign sent a much more contundent position days after the interview:
" I want to be clear on where I stand. I believe both Nicolas Maduro and Miguel Diaz-Canel are dictators. Their administrations have stifled free and fair elections, jailed political opponents, and suppressed the free and fair press. And yet, our federal government’s long history of punitive policies toward both countries, including extrajudicial killings of Venezuelans and the continuation of a decades long blockade of Cuba, have only worsened these conditions. Democratic socialism is about dignity, justice and accountability. And above all, it’s about building a democracy that works for working people, not one that preys on them."
I was mistaken about the timeline, it was a few days rather than 2 weeks. The point is that he successfully went on the podcast and spoke to that audience (in my opinion still making distasteful concessions) and then after that he worsened his stance and called them “dictators”.
He didn’t say it on the podcast, he said it 2 weeks later after the podcast host convinced him Venezuela and Cuba are bad.
“When New York Assembly member Zohran Mamdani finally decided to speak publicly about Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro and Cuban leader Miguel Díaz-Canel, he didn’t do it in a press conference or a statement through his office but on a podcast. He was being interviewed by none other than Emmy Award-winning journalist Jorge Ramos and his daughter, political commentator Paola Ramos”
-The Latin Times
I think he said it on the podcast, babes
I wouldn’t be condescending about a podcast I didn’t listen to. He was ambivalent in the interview, dodging the dictator question, and saying he didn’t know enough but that his democratic socialism was different from Maduro’s. Then he followed up afterwards explicitly calling both Maduro and Diaz-Canel dictators. It’s in the article you posted btw
He spoke publicly about them on the podcast (as your quote says), but he didn’t call them dictators on the podcast, as I said.
Quoted below from the linked article, emphasis added by me.
I was mistaken about the timeline, it was a few days rather than 2 weeks. The point is that he successfully went on the podcast and spoke to that audience (in my opinion still making distasteful concessions) and then after that he worsened his stance and called them “dictators”.