- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
Mayor says progressive peers who swept primaries speak to Americans ‘coast to coast’ as moderates have reservations
Zohran Mamdani, the New York City mayor, said on Sunday that he and a slew of democratic socialist allies who prevailed in recent primary elections are carrying a “national message” to struggling working Americans hungry for a new kind of politics “coast to coast”.
Mamdani made that triumphant clarion call on ABC News’s This Week just five days after he had seen his endorsed candidates win Democratic nominations in three races for New York congressional seats, as well as for five state legislature positions in Albany. He made no effort to disguise his delight that his clean sweep marks a dramatic shift in Democratic politics – not just in New York City, which he has led since January, but also across the US.
He said that collectively they were carrying a “New Deal understanding” of Democratic politics to Congress and on to the “national stage”. It spoke, he said, to Americans feeling exhaustion at struggling to make ends meet “every single day”.
The message is that American voters are increasingly lazy, polarized and/or tribalized, unable or unwilling to think for themselves, and vote for whomever they’re told. The same thing happens with Trump’s base.
I hate to break it to you, but most Americans never have the opportunity to personally interview their representatives.
Of course Americans vote for who they’re told to vote for. Every candidate is being built up by someone else. You’d say the same thing if all the candidates that the establishment DNC propped up had won. The trick is finding someone who both shares your values, and has the knowledge to give you an informed opinion. Mamdani is a pretty solid voice to listen to.
No the trick is to actually do some research, learn about the candidates, their positions, their reputation, and make an informed decision based on that, and not on anyone else’s opinion of them.
3a. Experts exist. If I have a specialty and recommend someone in my field that has more value than someone else who isn’t in that field. I know enough about this person and his expertise to take his opinion into account when forming my own.
They hated you for speaking the truth.
No, I think it’s because it’s a lazy, facile take. Americans can’t think for themselves and only do what they’re told? Trump’s been blasting shit at us from the country’s largest bully pulpit for a decade, why doesn’t he have 100% approval and support?
People vote for candidates for a variety of personal, communal, and environmental reasons. Some of that has to do with what those candidates say and do, but reducing it down to “Americans are brainless automatons who do what they’re told” is nonsense.
So when folks such as yourselves get downvoted spectacularly as such, does that just reinforce your underdeveloped, edgy opinions? If so, what a vicious cycle to have to deal with.
I don’t see downvotes in my instance so I’m not sure what you’re talking about.
Oh, I’ll help then. 2 people agreed with you and 33 thought your comment was worthless trash.
For real, I don’t know how else you explain people voting for whomever they’re told.
People hear candidates’ arguments and make their own (informed or otherwise) judgements about them. How exactly do you think this system of yours works? Do you think Americans count how many political ads they see and vote for whoever aired the most? or do they just check the box next to the last name they heard before they walked into the voting booth?
What you’re saying makes no sense. Of course people are going to vote for one of the candidates that wants their vote, those are the only kind of candidates on the ballot. How they choose which one is more complicated.
So you think it’s a coincidence that all those voters arrived at the same decision as Mamdani, entirely of their own volition, and they completely ignored his endorsement to oust establishment Dems? This is the line of logic you want to go with?
Did you read the thing you quoted? Obviously I don’t think it’s a coincidence.
LOL What’re you talking about!? You obviously do?
Tell me how you get from this to “it’s just a coincidence”
Tell me how you think people use rational thought processes to collectively come to the same decision as Mamdani, against establishment Dems, and its not coincidence…
No, people care about democratic socialism because it helps average, ordinary, working class people. Mamdani is a democratic socialist, and he endorses democratic socialists. So it makes sense that people who would vote for Mamdani, also vote for the people he endorses. That doesn’t mean his endorsement was the sole determining factor in their decision.
If people were just mindlessly voting for whomever they’re told, then why wouldn’t they have voted for the people Jeffries told them to? Why would he be so butthurt right now that people didn’t vote for the ones he picked?
Because they voted for the one Mamdani told them to?
Are you saying that they chose to value Mamdani’s opinion over Jeffries’ opinion? That they chose to vote for Mamdani’s picks rather than Jeffries’ picks?
Bear in mind, Mamdani is the underdog here, and Jefferies represents the party establishment. So criticizing people for siding with Mamdani over Jeffries just means you’re pulling water for centrism and the status quo…