Democrats trying to unseat each other IV

[Derec]

Garcia announced he was not seeking reelection earlier this month, just after the deadline to file paperwork for the seat. By then, his chief of staff was the only candidate who had submitted the needed paperwork.

I do not see how anybody could defend this behavior, Democrat or not.

 

[Derec]

Cameron Kasky, Parkland Survivor and Congressional Hopeful, Wants to Refocus the Democrats | Vanity Fair - "The 25-year-old activist, who is entering the race for Jerrold Nadler’s Manhattan seat, speaks to Vanity Fair about Jack Schlossberg, David Hogg, and “running on youth.”"

Why is somebody from Parkland, FL running for a seat in NYC? Have carpet bag, will travel?

Kasky insists that he is not “running on youth.” In an interview on Monday, he preferred to focus on a dozen issues that he defined as the core of his agenda, including opposing artificial intelligence, supporting Medicare for All, abolishing ICE, and stopping funding for what he described as the genocide in Gaza. “I try to avoid acting like being young makes me better at politics,” he said.

Again, there is no "genocide" in Gaza. A bunch of islamofascist terrorists (who would love to geocide the Jews) attacked Israel, murdered over a thousand people at a music concert and in their homes, and they also kidnapped hundreds. And fauxgressives like Kasky want to make it harder for Israel to defend itself against those people.

I think that’s what we need right now. The traditional politicians have spectacularly failed to put up an opposition in the phase of authoritarianism. So I believe we need to throw out the playbook and try something new.

Not Kasky though. Hard pass!

I also don’t want to be in an environment where we believe that youth equals progression. There are plenty of young candidates out there who are not the most progressive person on their ticket and plenty of candidates who are running on being a young person, as if that makes you good.

Being the most "progressive" candidate on the ballot does not make you good. I wish there were more young people embracing more moderate ideas instead of rehashing things like socialism and being anti Israel.

I believed for so long that we were going to be able to get more substantive gun reform passed, and while over 300 gun laws have directly been attributed to our efforts, and there were so many victories, because we did not get the massive victory that I believed we could obtain for a long time, I gave up and American politics broke my heart, and it took a long time for me to build my faith back up again.

What is the "massive victory" he wants? Banning guns?

And then I saw a genocide in Gaza, and I saw the ethnoreligion that is coded into my DNA being used to defend this mass killing.

He is hallucinating. And killing many people is not the same as "genocide". The Allies killed many people in WWII. Cities like Berlin and Tokyo were turned into a pile of rubble. German and Japanese civilians endured severe hardships. And yet this was not "genocide". It baffles me how a Jew can drink the Kool-Aid of judging Israel on a scale not used for any other country or armed conflict.

Suddenly, I realized I have no choice but to believe in my ability to make a change, even if we can only take it one step at a time, even if it is not something that can happen overnight. I began my young adult life calling for an end to mass violence being caused by American-made weapons. And I saw that again at a much larger scale.

That violence was in direct response to genocidal actions by Hamas and their allies. Just like Ukraine needs our help to defend itself from aggression, so does Israel. Note that Hamas, Hezbollah etc. are backed by the Iranian regime.
Iran sent $1b to Hezbollah in four months as water crisis worsens, researcher says

But people like Kasky never say anything bad about Hamas, or Hezbollah, or Iran. It's always "Israel bad" and "US bad". Part of it is surely the miseducation he received at Columbia, where he attended (apparently as a "general studies" major) before dropping out and moving to LA.

About social media, "I talked about the negative effects of social media to preface the fact that it is a necessary evil in reaching people. This is how you reach people now." Then saying that Zohran Mamdani did not win because of social media. "Zohran won because of his agenda to make New York City affordable for all Americans." and "But at the end of the day, I see plenty of people in office using social media to reach people who are not focusing on the real issues."

Make NYC affordable for all Americans? How would that even be possible? Especially since the very reason for high cost of living in NYC is that the demand to live and visit there is very high. In the 70s and 80s it was lower because it was a less desirable place to live, what with high crime and all.

 

[laughing dog]

Make NYC affordable for all Americans? How would that even be possible? Especially since the very reason for high cost of living in NYC is that the demand to live and visit there is very high. In the 70s and 80s it was lower because it was a less desirable place to live, what with high crime and all.

NYC has had rent control since 1947, and rent stabilization since 1969, both are supposed to destroy the standard of living according to you. So how is it possible NYC is such a desirable place to live!

 

[Derec]

He says "We need Medicare for All and we need it immediately."

Is "Medicare4All" really the panacea its supporters say it is? Especially since advocates like Bernie often conflate it with "single payer" even though Medicare is not a "single payer" program.

We need to stop funding genocide, not only in Gaza, but we also need to be imposing sanctions on the UAE for backing the RSF’s [Rapid Support Forces] genocidal war in Sudan. That includes many atrocities from mass sexual violence to civilians being slaughtered in hospitals.

Kudos to him for mentioning Sudan/UAE, but he is DARVOing the Gaza conflict - especially the "reverse victim and offender" part. Where is his condemnation of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Houthis and their masters in Tehran?

He says that we must abolish ICE, not just reforming it, and that "we must reestablish the Immigration and Naturalization Service abolished by the Homeland Security Act of 2002". Good to see someone saying that.

INS to ICE was just a reorganization and renaming. Renaming ICE back to INS would be part of a reform, not abolition. Abolition implies no immigration enforcement, based on left-wing slogan "no human is illegal". Kasky speaks with a forked tongue here. How would his reformed INS enforce immigration laws concretely here, if at all?

Attention to affordability in the economy, combatting hate crimes, protecting reproductive rights, dismantling the prison industrial complex—there’s so much that I want to focus on.

He talks about "hate crimes", but wants to dismantle the "prison industrial complex". Again, he is speaking with a forked tongue.

I think he is well out of his depth. What qualifications does he even have to represent ~760k people? He is a "theater kid" cum college dropout who has, from what I have read, pretty much drifted since then, and is hoping to get a congressional paycheck for nothing (and his chicks for free?)

I do think that one needs prison for some crimes, but there are alternatives, like stopping drug warring and using ankle monitors. Instead of arguing over whether or not to prosecute shoplifters, for instance, treat it as a summary offense, like a traffic violation, and give anyone caught an ankle monitor.

I think there needs to be an escalation for repeat offenders. Currently in NYC, a shoplifter can steal over and over again, and they get released with a desk appearance ticket every time. That teaches them that there are no consequences for their actions. I think that if you are RORed for a crime like shoplifting, and are arrested again, that a judge should be able to impose something like bail and/or an ankle monitor. If you cut that, or violate conditions, or are arrested yet again, you should go to jail pending trials for all three offenses.

 

[bilby]

The Allies killed many people in WWII. Cities like Berlin and Tokyo were turned into a pile of rubble. German and Japanese civilians endured severe hardships. And yet this was not "genocide".

It would have been if the Allies had lost.

In war, the victors get to punish the vanquished for their "crimes". It's never the other way about.

Bomber Harris met all the requirements for being a genocidal war criminal, except for the critical "being on the losing side" criterion. So did Harry S. Truman. And many other senior allied commanders.

 

[Derec]

It would have been if the Allies had lost.

There would have been baseless accusations of "genocide" by the Nazis, just like there are baseless accusation against Israel from Islamofascists and their useful idiots in the West.

Not much difference between Hamas and NSDAP except for skill.

In war, the victors get to punish the vanquished for their "crimes". It's never the other way about.

Punishment for a vanquished foe is not the definition of "genocide".

Bomber Harris met all the requirements for being a genocidal war criminal, except for the critical "being on the losing side" criterion.

Sir Arthur Harris may or may not have committed war crimes. However, I have not seen any credible claim that he had any genocidal intent against German people.

So did Harry S. Truman. And many other senior allied commanders.

Why the haberdasher? Because he ordered the Bombs to be dropped, shortening the war and likely saving many net American as well as Japanese lives?

 

[bilby]

It would have been if the Allies had lost.

There would have been baseless accusations of "genocide" by the Nazis

And plenty of well founded ones, too. Ask the people of Dresden.

In war, the victors get to punish the vanquished for their "crimes". It's never the other way about.

Punishment for a vanquished foe is not the definition of "genocide".

I never suggested that it was.

I am saying that winners get a pass. If your side won, your war crimes are very unlikely to be punished, particularly if they are big ones, whose perpetrators hold high rank.

Bomber Harris met all the requirements for being a genocidal war criminal, except for the critical "being on the losing side" criterion.

Sir Arthur Harris may or may not have committed war crimes. However, I have not seen any credible claim that he had any genocidal intent against German people.

Are you kidding? It was his stated policy to target "worker's housing". Where did he think worker's families would be at night?

So did Harry S. Truman. And many other senior allied commanders.

Why the haberdasher? Because he ordered the Bombs to be dropped,

Yes.

shortening the war and likely saving many net American as well as Japanese lives?

It was still a war crime. If you murder someone, it is not a defence to argue that killing him saved lives, even if it is true.

 

[lpetrich]

Why ankle monitors? To alert store clerks about the presence of a known shoplifter. The clerks can then keep out that person or else allow them to shop while being watched.

That can be expanded to other petty crimes, like for enforcing exclusion from certain neighborhoods.

One would keep jail in reserve, for anyone who removes their ankle monitor, but one ought to help monitored people with their monitors.

 

[lpetrich]

Reducing crime is easy—and we actually know how to do it

Let’s start with the 1970s. Professor of psychology David Olds identified a large sample of mostly white, poor, young, and unmarried pregnant women in the rural town of Elmira, New York. This group of disadvantaged mothers was divided into two groups: experimental and control. The mothers in the former group received regular in-home visitations by registered nurses during their pregnancies and also after their babies were born, for two years. During these visits, the nurses provided parenting tips, helped the moms access social services, answered questions about health, medicine, diet, nutrition, discipline, and so forth. The mothers in the control group did not experience any of these supportive visitations.

What happened?

Compared to those in the control group, the single moms who received the nurse visits were far less likely to become pregnant again, much more likely to become employed, and much less likely to abuse or neglect their kids. Over a decade later, their kids were much less likely to be using alcohol or drugs and—most importantly—were much less likely to have ever been arrested.

Then citing a lot of similar research, concluding

There are so many more such programs out there, not just within the United States, but around the world, that focus on vulnerable populations, provide them with supportive help, and thereby effectively decrease overall criminal activity. Such programs certainly cost money, but they are much cheaper and more cost-effective than not having them. Indeed, it is much more efficient, to say nothing of being more humane, to invest in preventative social welfare programs than to build and staff prisons.

 

[Jarhyn]

Indeed, it is much more efficient, to say nothing of being more humane, to invest in preventative social welfare programs than to build and staff prisons.

But, what if the goal is instead to secure cheap (slave) labor for unskilled positions?

 

[Derec]

NYC has had rent control since 1947, and rent stabilization since 1969, both are supposed to destroy the standard of living according to you. So how is it possible NYC is such a desirable place to live!

It's not "according to me", it's according to almost all economists.
It is despite these cockamamie schemes that NYC is a desirable place to live, not because of them.

If you decree that an apartment must be rented below market price, how do you decide who gets the apartment? Economics is all about allocation of scarce resources. Market-based economics is pretty straightforward - supply and demand are a function of price (among other things) and price is in turn a function of supply and demand. That helps equilibrate supply and demand. For example, if two couples are interested in buying the same house, one of them may make an offer above the asking price to win the bid. Alternatively, if the demand is soft, the seller might have to accept offers below asking. But what do you do if the government sets the price well below market price? Then demand necessarily exceeds demand, i.e. more people want to rent than there are places available. So how do you allocate these scarce resources? Membership in the Party? Right demographics (with cis-het white males placed on the bottom of the progressive stack)? Or do you just accept that people in charge will just accept under-the-table payments? Because that's what government price control invariably do - they are breeding grounds for corruption and black markets.

I know NYC has had these rent control/stabilization schemes for a long time. The whole thing is so infamous it is often used as a plot point for TV shows and movies set in NYC. For example, Seinfeld used both corruption by the super and his assistant as well as appealing to the tenant board with a sob story to get an apartment. Of course, George still lost because a third guy (the Bad Breaker Upper) bribed the super.

All kidding aside, how would you allocate below-market-price apartments?

 

[laughing dog]

NYC has had rent control since 1947, and rent stabilization since 1969, both are supposed to destroy the standard of living according to you. So how is it possible NYC is such a desirable place to live!

It's not "according to me", it's according to almost all economists.

Please cite at least 3 economists who claim rent controls destroy living standards,

It is despite these cockamamie schemes that NYC is a desirable place to live, not because of them.

So don’t believe rent controls destroy living standards.

If you decree that an apartment must be rented below market price, how do you decide who gets the apartment? Economics is all about allocation of scarce resources. Market-based economics is pretty straightforward - supply and demand are a function of price (among other things) and price is in turn a function of supply and demand. That helps equilibrate supply and demand. For example, if two couples are interested in buying the same house, one of them may make an offer above the asking price to win the bid. Alternatively, if the demand is soft, the seller might have to accept offers below asking. But what do you do if the government sets the price well below market price? Then demand necessarily exceeds demand, i.e. more people want to rent than there are places available. So how do you allocate these scarce resources? Membership in the Party? Right demographics (with cis-het white males placed on the bottom of the progressive stack)? Or do you just accept that people in charge will just accept under-the-table payments? Because that's what government price control invariably do - they are breeding grounds for corruption and black markets. [/quote] Markets allocate resources based on ability and desire to supply and the ability and desire to buy. But there is nothing magical about the outcome. There is more inherent reason that an allocation resulting ftom a market is socially fairer or more desirable than the outcome from any other allocation. By the way, markets are breeding grounds of corruption.

My point is the rent control or stabilization is not the bete noire you claim. Any process of allocation and distribution has its benefits snd costs,

 

[lpetrich]

She's trying again. Democrat Nida Allam brings major progressive backers to challenge incumbent US Rep. Foushee • NC Newsline

Foushee, a fixture in Orange County politics, defeated Allam and a half dozen other candidates in a crowded field to win the Democratic primary in 2022. Foushee won about 46% of the 2022 primary vote, with Allam placing second with about 37%.

...
Foushee was criticized in 2022 for accepting contributions from the pro-Israel lobbying group American Israel Public Affairs Committee, known as AIPAC. The state Democratic Party’s progressive caucus pulled its endorsement from Foushee that year because AIPAC supported Republicans who voted against certifying the 2020 presidential election.

AIPAC was Foushee’s top campaign contributor in 2022, bundling donations topping $2 million, Indy Week has reported.

Foushee faced another round of criticism for her 2024 trip to Israel, paid for by an AIPAC affiliate, where she and other members of Congress met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A Foushee campaign spokesperson told Indy Week in August that Foushee will not accept AIPAC contributions for the 2026 election.

A photo of Foushee in a group posing with Netanyahu is one of the images that flashes through Allam’s first congressional campaign video of the season.

“When right-wing and corporate PACs fund our politicians, they buy silence,” Allam says in the video. “I’m not taking a cent from AIPAC, crypto mega-donors, or corporate PACs,” she says. “You can’t serve them and fight for working families.”

 

[Harry Bosch]

She's trying again. Democrat Nida Allam brings major progressive backers to challenge incumbent US Rep. Foushee • NC Newsline

Foushee, a fixture in Orange County politics, defeated Allam and a half dozen other candidates in a crowded field to win the Democratic primary in 2022. Foushee won about 46% of the 2022 primary vote, with Allam placing second with about 37%.

...
Foushee was criticized in 2022 for accepting contributions from the pro-Israel lobbying group American Israel Public Affairs Committee, known as AIPAC. The state Democratic Party’s progressive caucus pulled its endorsement from Foushee that year because AIPAC supported Republicans who voted against certifying the 2020 presidential election.

AIPAC was Foushee’s top campaign contributor in 2022, bundling donations topping $2 million, Indy Week has reported.

Foushee faced another round of criticism for her 2024 trip to Israel, paid for by an AIPAC affiliate, where she and other members of Congress met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A Foushee campaign spokesperson told Indy Week in August that Foushee will not accept AIPAC contributions for the 2026 election.

A photo of Foushee in a group posing with Netanyahu is one of the images that flashes through Allam’s first congressional campaign video of the season.

“When right-wing and corporate PACs fund our politicians, they buy silence,” Allam says in the video. “I’m not taking a cent from AIPAC, crypto mega-donors, or corporate PACs,” she says. “You can’t serve them and fight for working families.”

You are obsessed with AIPAC.

 

[Derec]

And plenty of well founded ones, too. Ask the people of Dresden.

Just because a war campaign is destructive and has many casualties does not make it a "genocide".

I never suggested that it was.

Effectively, you did.

I am saying that winners get a pass. If your side won, your war crimes are very unlikely to be punished, particularly if they are big ones, whose perpetrators hold high rank.

That may or may not be true, but there is a difference between war crimes in general and the specific crime of "genocide".

Are you kidding? It was his stated policy to target "worker's housing". Where did he think worker's families would be at night?

Even if that was a war crime under the laws of warfare in effect at the time, it is not "genocide" since the objective was to harm the Reich's ability to prosecute the war, and not to exterminate the German People.

Why the haberdasher? Because he ordered the Bombs to be dropped,

Yes.

But again, the goal was to end the war, not to exterminate the Japanese people.

It was still a war crime. If you murder someone, it is not a defence to argue that killing him saved lives, even if it is true.

Defense of others is a valid defense for homicide actually, as long as you are defending against an imminent threat. At least in the US. I don't know about Down Under; will the person who killed one of the Bondi Beach "Globalize the Intifada" terrorists be brought up on murder charges?

In any case, even if it were a war crime (I don't think it was), that still does not make it "genocide".

 

[Derec]

She's trying again. Democrat Nida Allam brings major progressive backers to challenge incumbent US Rep. Foushee • NC Newsline

What is with the prevalence of religious Muslims within the fauxgressive wing of the Democratic Party?

 

[Derec]

Please cite at least 3 economists who claim rent controls destroy living standards,

"Destroy living standards" are your words, not mine. But economists are generally opposed to rent controls.

So don’t believe rent controls destroy living standards.

A lot goes into living standards than just one policy.
But rent controls are definitely harmful to the housing market as they discourage increasing supply and encourage black market and other market manipulation.

My point is the rent control or stabilization is not the bete noire you claim. Any process of allocation and distribution has its benefits and costs,

You have not answered any of my questions and objections about these policies. Of course for the lucky few who get cheap apartments the "rent freeze" is a benefit. But it's a negative for everybody else. And you have ignored my question about how you choose who gets such artificially cheap apartments. Because whenever something is traded below market price, demand > supply. If the gap to market price is high, then demand >> supply. Which means there needs to be some selection criteria about who gets the scarce good.

 

[Derec]

One would keep jail in reserve, for anyone who removes their ankle monitor, but one ought to help monitored people with their monitors.

Or is arrested for crimes while awaiting trial for a previous arrest. One big problem with NY's bail deform is that judges are not allowed to escalate and jail repeat shoplifters for example.

NYC’s No. 1 recidivist just can’t stop stealing — even after mind-boggling 134 arrests

 

[lpetrich]

Congressional candidate uses campaign funds to feed people in need - May 14, 2025 10:26 AM PT

From some of her videos,

“We have a representation problem,” the first line of the “About” page on her website reads.

“As in, about half of Congress are millionaires and people born before the Moon landing. And that's part of the reason we're in this mess: Our leaders are out of touch.”

...
“My congressional campaign is feeding people right now,” she starts in a recent TikTok video.

“Part of the reason I decided to run was because I saw how much money gets wasted in politics, and I thought, ‘What if we spent it differently?’”

She adds that the campaign is focused on “direct action and mutual aid,” emphasizing that she wanted her run for office to be “dual-purpose,” in which she can get her message out and help people in the process.

It’s a stark pivot from the traditional way of campaigning in the United States, which often includes pricey fundraising galas, attack ads, big billboards, and perhaps the most criticized and unpopular feature: massive donations from private businesses and interest groups.

...
“Our kick-off event, for instance, didn’t charge $500 a plate,” Abughazaleh shared in her TikTok. “People just had to bring a box of pads or tampons, which were donated to Chicago’s period collective. By the end of the night, we had gathered over 5,600 period products, which went to people who can’t afford them.”

...
“We asked folks to come out and donate food in exchange for a campaign yard or window sign,” Abughazaleh said. “And by the end of the day, we were able to fully stock the empty pantry and fill the fridge with frozen meals, produce, and eggs. That’s feeding people right now.”

“Don’t worry, we checked to make sure this is legal," she added. "And it is."

...
“Every single year, political campaigns spend billions on American elections, and only one candidate wins each race. So where does that money go?” Abughazaleh continued.

For many campaigns, she said, people will hire expensive consultants, pay for dozens of ads that are all very similar, and rack up “frivolous expenditures.”

“Something you’ll rarely see is concrete help in their communities during the campaign,” she said. “And frankly, to me, that just seems stupid. Not only do you get to help people — supposedly what you’re running to do — but it also shows what you’re about, instead of just providing lip service.”

...
“If every campaign adopted this model, then we wouldn’t be wasting money every single cycle. Every city, town, and village across America would be improved by their election process, and I think it would also get people more involved,” she said.

“We have local folks who have never voted in an election, but they joined our volunteer Discord server because they want to help, they feel like they have something to vote for.”

...
“Frankly, I would love it if other campaigns took our model. Use it, pretend it’s yours, I don’t care!” she wrapped up her TikTok.

“Pair with organizations in your community that have been doing the work, talk with local experts, and try to spearhead any initiatives you can to show your values and help your constituents. It’s really that easy.”

 

[lpetrich]

Kat Abughazaleh Thinks Campaign Funds Should Feed People - December 26 2025, 6:00 a.m - The Illinois congressional candidate turned her campaign office into a mutual aid hub.

Nearly $7 billion couldn’t keep President Donald Trump from returning to the White House and Republicans from controlling the House and Senate.

“It made me physically nauseous,” said Democratic congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh, reflecting on the massive sums Democrats raised and spent on the 2024 presidential election, “thinking about how many people could be fed, or how many clinics could be funded, or how much student debt could be paid off.”

...
Situated at the front of her 9th Congressional District campaign office are rows of basics like diapers and winter clothes to medical supplies like Narcan. “We’ve also had people bring in stuff like nail polish,” said Abughazaleh, adding, “everyone deserves good things.” Anyone is welcome to come off the street, she explained, without checking for income or immigration status.

In addition to offering supplies while the office is open, the campaign also helps stock a community fridge available any time of day and hosts drives to collect specific supplies. A request for tampons for Chicago’s Period Collective, for example, resulted in a massive outpouring of support. “We ended up getting over 5,600, and my campaign manager’s car was just filled with tampons,” said Abughazaleh through laughter. “I wanted him to get pulled over so bad.”

The point here is to “show” the campaign’s values through providing for the community, rather than simply telling people why they should vote for her, said Abughazaleh.

“I grew up Republican,” she said, “and I can’t think of anything that would have made me be a Democrat faster — especially if it were today, when people have lost all faith in the political system — than people showing their values rather than just saying them.”

...
“I can’t think of anything more convincing for voters, but also just the right thing to do during that period, and during all of this, than the Democratic Party using its immense resources to — with no strings attached — stock food banks, fund clinics, and make sure people have what they need,” she said.

“We don’t need to spend $20 million to make lefty Joe Rogan in a lab,” Abughazaleh added, in a nod to a strategic pitch Democratic operatives offered earlier this year. “We can spend $20 million on making sure kids have enough to eat, or making sure that parents have baby formula, or making sure that older folks are having meals actually delivered.”

The article has a picture that shows lots of donated clothing.

Some people have claimed that she is trying to buy votes, like in this xweet claiming that she ought to remove all references to her campaign from her charitable operations.

Accusations of “vote buying” are a serious risk for candidates implementing strategies like Abughazaleh’s, said Jessica Byrd, a political strategist who served as chief of staff for Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams. “One accusation of buying votes, and your entire campaign is under a microscope. It slows you down, it makes you less effective, and then you have to spend money to defend yourself,” explained Byrd. “So it really is a risk.”