Split New York City Mayoral Race

[Swammerdami]

I am delighted that Zohran Mamdani won the New York mayoral primary. (Unfortunately, it may just cause the fascists to declare war on New York City the way they've declared war on California.)

I am delighted that Democratic Socialists have been winning elections to the U.S. House of Reps. (Two of them lost their bids for re-election. How strong is the support for DemSocs? And of course the seats they win are all seats certain to be won by Democrats anyway.)

Jarhyn's goals and the goals of left-of-center moderates may not be so awfully different. But there are major differences in priorities. Trump has turned the country over to hard-core fascists. Reversing that ASAP is of paramount importance. That's what this thread is about; How did such a disgusting brat win the White House? We do know that millions of uninformed Americans voted for Trump as a backlash against DEI policies.

In the 2020 Dem primaries, Biden won 50½% of votes cast vs 27% for Bernie. In the 2016 primary in Pennsylvania -- the Key swing state -- Clinton won 55½% to 46½%. The Dems have made many mistakes in recent Presidential campaigns, but the idea that they would have won with a DemSoc candidate seems to be a fiction.

Except this produces a candidate that doesn't work in the general.

Says who? Does it mean YOU won't vote for them? Does it mean Higgins or Swammer or Whoever else won't?

Of course not! To won a national election in this ignorant racist commie-hating country, we have to appeal to the commie-haters. Yes, there are DemSocs winning elections. They are NOT winning in the many districts where ignorant commie-haters are a majority.

And an "informed decision" not to vote is an oxymoron

You can make this claim, but the other thing has been tried all my life, and until the gerontocracy falls, maybe we need to try other stuff, ya?

"Gerontocracy"? Did you notice the recent stat showing Trump's margin among 21 year-old men was stronger than his margin among 75 year-old men?

We tried it your way and now we have Trump because the Dems shit their spines out some time in the 80's.

You raise taxes, it's passed along to the consumer and prices go up.

Bullshit.

It depends on who and what you tax, and to what extent, and how the laws are written.

Taxes are USUALLY passed on to consumers.

We know damn well that the sales tax laws were written in the US, for example, to prevent the obviousness of the cost of taxes, to make it not seem like the company gouging even more.

The usual complaint is the exact OPPOSITE: That sales taxes are deliberately made visible to "help" consumers hate government.

Why do you keep claiming that moderates are Nazi? Channeling Barbos??! I disagree with some of Zohran ideas. How does that make me a Nazi?

Jarhyn seems to think outrageous hyperbole will strengthen his arguments (or at least give him pleasure)! I'm not sure if he thinks we're all gullible morons, or if he just posts to vent his anger.

I do NOT have an easy solution to the present political woes. I DO think we need to engage the ignorant Trump-voting masses POLITELY, and try to open their eyes to reality. Screaming at them is counter-productive. Screaming at fellow Democrats who would never vote for Trump is ... what? Indulging some sado-masochistic fetish?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Except this produces a candidate that doesn't work in the general.

Says who? Does it mean YOU won't vote for them? Does it mean Higgins or Swammer or Whoever else won't?

And an "informed decision" not to vote is an oxymoron

You can make this claim, but the other thing has been tried all my life, and until the gerontocracy falls, maybe we need to try other stuff, ya?

We tried it your way and now we have Trump because the Dems shit their spines out some time in the 80's.

So you suggest jumping from the frying pan to the fire.

This provides no market incentive to build tall. Thus people will not build tall, you'll get LA type sprawls or worse.

Tall doesn't need to be that tall, and the incentives to do so don't need to come from the market; rather they shouldn't, because like healthcare and other services, some things the market only ruins.

The taller a building the more expensive per square foot. Thus you only see tall buildings where land value makes that economic. If you take that land value away nobody builds up, the city sprawls and you spend a lot more on roads, transit etc.

You raise taxes, it's passed along to the consumer and prices go up.

Bullshit.

It depends on who and what you tax, and to what extent, and how the laws are written.

We know damn well that the sales tax laws were written in the US, for example, to prevent the obviousness of the cost of taxes, to make it not seem like the company gouging even more.

Not one bit a rebuttal.

Why do you keep claiming that moderates are Nazi? Channeling Barbos??! I disagree with some of Zohran ideas. How does that make me a Nazi?

I would never vote for crooked Cuomo if I lived in NY City, and I would vote for a progressive even if I didn't agree with all of their positions. I usually vote in the primaries for the candidate I think can beat the Republican candidate. Luckily, I don't live in NYC.

I wasn't a big fan of Warnock, but after reading all the data on the candidates, I voted for him in the primaries because I believed he was the only Democrat who could win in Georgia. As an atheist, It was hard voting for a pastor and I was disappointed when he didn't even give up his work as a pastor after he was elected, but considering the alternative, I had no problem voting for him in the general. We will never get everything we want and calling people Nazis because they aren't as progressive as you is not based on reality.

I'll call people "Nazis" who seek to prioritize "trains running on time" over "keeping those trains from shipping people off".

That doesn't make me extremist, because *Nazis are exactly the people who prefer the trains running on time*.

It is absolutely based on reality, because we have a demonstrated world war, against Nazis, wherein their power arose from a lack of cultural zeal to choose "keeping those trains from shipping people to camps" over "trains running on time.

Germany took reasonable measures to identify and disempower such movements since, but we sit here in America letting it happen here.

Until people realize their priorities are messed the hell up, that their priorities are empowering Nazis, what would you have me do?

Over a hundred Democrats in Congress sided against impeachment proceedings FFS.

What you are missing is that by not voting you're saying late trains and trains shipping people off are equally bad.

 

[Politesse]

Of course not! To won a national election in this ignorant racist commie-hating country, we have to appeal to the commie-haters. Yes, there are DemSocs winning elections. They are NOT winning in the many districts where ignorant commie-haters are a majority.

"We" will never appeal to ignorant racist commie-haters. No matter how much we concede to them. They want our deaths, not our vague and inconsistent support. It doesn't matter what someone says they are "considering thinking about", they simply do not want gay Mexican urban planners in office, and no amount of "signaling" that we are "listening to their concerns" is going to make a queer foreigner from the city more attractive to their sensibilities than a Nazi ditz from an affluent rural suburb.

 

[southernhybrid]

I find it hypocritical that some of you complain about boomers and other older adults in Congress, while at the same time supporting Bernie Sanders who is 84 and recently said he would run for another term, which would make him 90 if he wins and is still alive and mentally intact. We need term limits, not age limits. Bernie has been in Congress for a long time, and he's one of the oldest members of Congress. Bernie wants to cling to power as much as the rest of them, regardless of age.

I guess it's okay if someone is a member of the "gerontocracy" if you agree with their positions. Plus, the ageist remarks by some of you are noted. Ageism is as offensive as any other type of prejudice. In fact, ageism has often been described as the last acceptable form of prejudice.

The current guy is destroying our country, but some of you can only bitch about moderate or left of center candidates who would at least try to preserve the country and preserve our most important social programs."Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress."

 

[Swammerdami]

Of course not! To win a national election in this ignorant racist commie-hating country, we have to appeal to the commie-haters. Yes, there are DemSocs winning elections. They are NOT winning in the many districts where ignorant commie-haters are a majority.

"We" will never appeal to ignorant racist commie-haters. No matter how much we concede to them. They want our deaths, not our vague and inconsistent support. It doesn't matter what someone says they are "considering thinking about", they simply do not want gay Mexican urban planners in office, and no amount of "signaling" that we are "listening to their concerns" is going to make a queer foreigner from the city more attractive to their sensibilities than a Nazi ditz from an affluent rural suburb.

Wrong. There are different degrees of ignorance, racism, and commie-hating. There were MANY people from America's huge "redneck" Middle who aren't completely racist (Obama was elected twice), and who watch CNN regularly, and who DID have severe misgivings about the pussy-grabbing fraudster; but who DID choose Trump as (what they thought to be) the lesser of two evils.

Reducing these many millions of slightly racist centrists from America's heartland to caricatures -- or calling them "deplorables" -- is a good way to turn them off, and make them believe that Trump, despite his many faults that they are well aware of, might be "the lesser of two evils."

More succinctly, the anger and bitterness that you and Jarhyn represent is part of the PROBLEM and NOT part of the solution.

 

[Derec]

I am delighted that Zohran Mamdani won the New York mayoral primary.

Of course you are! Mr. Cardamom is advocating policies such as government grocery stores, rent freezes, and "globalizing the Intifada". What's not to love? /s
There is still a chance for Cuomo to beat him in the general election though.

(Unfortunately, it may just cause the fascists to declare war on New York City the way they've declared war on California.)

Immigration enforcement will definitely be a volatile issue if Mamdani gets into the Gracy Mansion. He is all in on protecting illegals from deportation.

I am delighted that Democratic Socialists have been winning elections to the U.S. House of Reps.

Again, of course you are!

(Two of them lost their bids for re-election.

Two of the worst ones too. Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman.

How strong is the support for DemSocs?

It was waning going into 2024, but seems to be waxing again, unfortunately. That is, if Zohran's win in the NYC primary is any sort of bellwether.

And of course the seats they win are all seats certain to be won by Democrats anyway.)

Indeed. They are not expanding the map, and if anything they are contracting it by being loud and making themselves the face of the Party.

Jarhyn's goals and the goals of left-of-center moderates may not be so awfully different. But there are major differences in priorities. Trump has turned the country over to hard-core fascists. Reversing that ASAP is of paramount importance. That's what this thread is about; How did such a disgusting brat win the White House? We do know that millions of uninformed Americans voted for Trump as a backlash against DEI policies.

I think Dems again seem to be drawing the wrong conclusion from a lost election. Dems swerved hard left after 2016, and now they seem to be moving in the same direction.
I think that the post-2016 swerve was instrumental in getting Trump reelected. 2020 was a freak election due to the Pandemic, and Dems saved themselves by nominating an ostensible moderate. However, he governed very much to the left, adopting many Sanders-AOC priorities.
I agree with you that overreach on social issues - purity culture on trans issues, and DEI more generally, was damaging. Take affirmative action. It is not very popular - a ballot measure reinstating racial preferences in college admissions failed in deep blue California by some margin (57-43%). And yes, when SCOTUS made a recent, but long overdue, decision to limit racial preferences, Biden vociferously attacked it. How tone deaf can you be?
On spending he was also toeing the Progressive line. He overspent, which made inflation worse. Inflation was one of the chief reasons his administration was so unpopular.

The Dems have made many mistakes in recent Presidential campaigns, but the idea that they would have won with a DemSoc candidate seems to be a fiction.

Indeed. I might also add - the idea that Kamala Harris of all people was not progressive enough was fiction.

Of course not! To won a national election in this ignorant racist commie-hating country, we have to appeal to the commie-haters. Yes, there are DemSocs winning elections. They are NOT winning in the many districts where ignorant commie-haters are a majority.

There is nothing "ignorant" about not supporting DemSocs.

"Gerontocracy"? Did you notice the recent stat showing Trump's margin among 21 year-old men was stronger than his margin among 75 year-old men?

I said it before, and I say it again. The reason for this is that Dems have largely abandoned men, and especially young men, as a voting block they are interested in. They are an afterthought at best.

I do NOT have an easy solution to the present political woes. I DO think we need to engage the ignorant Trump-voting masses POLITELY, and try to open their eyes to reality. Screaming at them is counter-productive. Screaming at fellow Democrats who would never vote for Trump is ... what? Indulging some sado-masochistic fetish?

We disagree on a lot of things, but I think we can fully agree here.

 

[Tigers!]

I am delighted that Zohran Mamdani won the New York mayoral primary.

Of course you are! Mr. Cardamom is advocating policies such as government grocery stores, rent freezes, and "globalizing the Intifada". What's not to love? /s
There is still a chance for Cuomo to beat him in the general election though.

Perhaps someone can help me, as an outsider, understand the very recent New York mayoral election.
I thought that it was a Democratic primary viz. who would be chosen as the Democratic mayoral candidate?
But reading the news here it is said that Mamdani is now the mayor. I would have thought that a general election, open to all voters, for mayor would be required first?
What happned to the mayor who was there last week and who were they?

 

[Politesse]

I am delighted that Zohran Mamdani won the New York mayoral primary.

Of course you are! Mr. Cardamom is advocating policies such as government grocery stores, rent freezes, and "globalizing the Intifada". What's not to love? /s
There is still a chance for Cuomo to beat him in the general election though.

Perhaps someone can help me, as an outsider, understand the very recent New York mayoral election.
I thought that it was a Democratic primary viz. who would be chosen as the Democratic mayoral candidate?
But reading the news here it is said that Mamdani is now the mayor. I would have thought that a general election, open to all voters, for mayor would be required first?
What happned to the mayor who was there last week and who were they?

No, you were correct the first time that this was a primary. Mamdani is now the Democratic candidate, and will be running against current mayor Eric Adams (now an Independent) and Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa in November. Cuomo may also still be in the race, running under the aegis of his self-founded Fight and Deliver party. Usually there isn't much of a question after the primary, since Republicans have little hold on New Yorkers' imagination, but this may be a more tightly contested general election than usual, given all the drama. Expect many more posts about NYC in the months to come. There are already stories about some major donors pulling their support from the Democrats and throwing it behind Adams. Better a criminal than a socialist, apparently! Meanwhile Eric Adams is and remains the mayor of New York City.

 

[pood]

As a New Yorker, I would say that under these circumstances, Mamdani will probably win with a plurality in a multi-candidate field. Sliwa has very little chance, and like Cuomo and Adams, who is thoroughly corrupt, he is a total prick.

 

[steve_bank]

In the news the NYC democratic mayoral candidate a self described socialist.

Zohran Mamdani, the recent winner of the Democratic primary for mayor of New York City, campaigned on policy proposals that included free city buses and rent freezes for households in rent-stabilized units.
These proposals were part of his broader platform focused on addressing New York City's affordability crisis. Mamdani's campaign also advocated for city-owned grocery stores and free childcare, and proposed to pay for these initiatives by raising taxes on high earners and corporations. These policy ideas are seen as representative of the Democratic Party's progressive wing.

The tired old progressive mantra, vote fr me and everything is free.

Our progressive Washington has a debt crisis and is still adding programs.

 

[Politesse]

In the news the NYC democratic mayoral candidate a self described socialist.

Zohran Mamdani, the recent winner of the Democratic primary for mayor of New York City, campaigned on policy proposals that included free city buses and rent freezes for households in rent-stabilized units.
These proposals were part of his broader platform focused on addressing New York City's affordability crisis. Mamdani's campaign also advocated for city-owned grocery stores and free childcare, and proposed to pay for these initiatives by raising taxes on high earners and corporations. These policy ideas are seen as representative of the Democratic Party's progressive wing.

The tired old progressive mantra, vote fr me and everything is free.

Our progressive Washington has a debt crisis and is still adding programs.

What should be the Democrat's mantra?

 

[ZiprHead]

In the news the NYC democratic mayoral candidate a self described socialist.

Zohran Mamdani, the recent winner of the Democratic primary for mayor of New York City, campaigned on policy proposals that included free city buses and rent freezes for households in rent-stabilized units.
These proposals were part of his broader platform focused on addressing New York City's affordability crisis. Mamdani's campaign also advocated for city-owned grocery stores and free childcare, and proposed to pay for these initiatives by raising taxes on high earners and corporations. These policy ideas are seen as representative of the Democratic Party's progressive wing.

The tired old progressive mantra, vote fr me and everything is free.

When has Mamdani ever said it would be free? As a matter of fact one of his staple issues is he wants to raise taxes on those making over a million a year.

Our progressive Washington has a debt crisis and is still adding programs.

In case you haven't heard, New York is not Washington. The debt crisis in Washington is all on the Republicans who keep slashing taxes on the wealthy.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

In the news the NYC democratic mayoral candidate a self described socialist.

Zohran Mamdani, the recent winner of the Democratic primary for mayor of New York City, campaigned on policy proposals that included free city buses and rent freezes for households in rent-stabilized units.
These proposals were part of his broader platform focused on addressing New York City's affordability crisis. Mamdani's campaign also advocated for city-owned grocery stores and free childcare, and proposed to pay for these initiatives by raising taxes on high earners and corporations. These policy ideas are seen as representative of the Democratic Party's progressive wing.

The tired old progressive mantra, vote fr me and everything is free.

Our progressive Washington has a debt crisis and is still adding programs.

First he needs to win the general election. And then he is shackled with reality of running a massive city. We've let the moderates run it, then a couple relative failures. It generally works. It isn't like the 70s. But that doesn't mean the experience and standard of living is great for all.

I get you are a bit scarred with the tilting too far to the left in Seattle thing, but this is NYC. But this isn't about free, it is about viable access to things like housing, groceries, banking.

 

[Derec]

I get you are a bit scarred with the tilting too far to the left in Seattle thing, but this is NYC.

It's not just Seattle. Chicago is also suffering because they elected a far-left mayor, Brandon Johnson. And Mamdani is even further to the left.

But this isn't about free, it is about viable access to things like housing, groceries, banking.

Housing is an intractable issue. You have a popular piece of real estate, with many people wanting to live there. That will drive prices up. Especially in a place like Manhattan that is geographically constrained.
Zohran's prescription for this is "rent freeze" on many apartments, which amounts to a government price control. He also wants to build 200k affordable apartments, but where? And how would those below-market-price units be allocated? Lottery? Racial preferences?

As to groceries and banking, is there any evidence that New Yorkers do not have viable access to those things? With grocery stores, Mr. Cardamom wants to build government-owned grocery stores that do not have to pay rent or property tax, nor have to turn a profit. Grocery business operates on thin margins already, so this would likely make many private grocery stores and bodegas unsustainable. This policy would thus would likely decrease access, not increase it.

 

[Derec]

As a New Yorker, I would say that under these circumstances, Mamdani will probably win with a plurality in a multi-candidate field.

I think that is likely. But if he wins with a minority of say 30-35%, how much of a mandate will he really have for his radical agenda?
Why doesn't NYC do runoffs, either traditional or instant?

Sliwa has very little chance, and like Cuomo and Adams, who is thoroughly corrupt, he is a total prick.

The smart play would be to select the strongest of the three non-socialists, and for the other two to drop out to make it a binary choice.

 

[ZiprHead]

how much of a mandate will he really have for his radical agenda?

What is actually radical about Mamdani's agenda?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

blah blah blah...You are quick to excuse his support for Palestinian violence ... blah blah blah

I've checked in a few times to this ridiculously derailed thread and I will repeat again what I said before.

The cause of the dem loss is well-documented. It was most related to economics.

That SHOULD BE the end of the thread. However, some people want to use the thread as their own personal platform to go on ad infinitum in attacks against anything related to Democrats.

It isn't worth the effort to read every page in this thread, but I will continue to check in every long while to yet again point this out to people.

 

[bilby]

Public transportation is infrastructure. Infrastructure should be free at point of use, and funded through general taxation, because the users are not the primary beneficiaries.

I agree that public transportation is infrastructure. And while I agree that government should invest in public transportation, I do not think that means that there should not be reasonable fares to use it.

When you drive on city roads, you get the road for "free". Why should the same not apply to riding a city bus?

I don't know about Down Under, but here roads are not paid through general taxation, but through gasoline taxes and registration fees.
Besides, when you use a bus, you not only use city roads but also the equipment as well as the labor of the driver and everybody else involved in transit such as dispatchers and bus mechanics.
Why should not the riders contribute a few bucks then?

Because, as I said, these are not generally things the rider wants. People don't ride city buses for a hobby. They are riding the bus in order to do something else - go to work, go to the shops, go to a show; The bus is part of the infrastructure that enables these economic activities, it is not an economic end in itself, and should have its costs paid by society at large, in rough proportion to the benefits each member society reaps from the existence of infrastructure.

A simple way to approximate who benefits, and by how much, from infrastructure is to look at people's income. Higher income implies more benefits from the existence of infrastructure.

 

[Tigers!]

"free" buses,

There are many places around the world that have free buses. And NYC already had it.

Public transportation is infrastructure. Infrastructure should be free at point of use, and funded through general taxation, because the users are not the primary beneficiaries.

If I catch the bus to work, my employer is the beneficiary. If I catch the bus to the store, the store is the beneficiary.

If I catch the train to work, my employer is a beneficiary as am I.

When you drive on city roads, you get the road for "free".

In Melbourne there are lots (and more coming ) of tolls roads. And lots of potholes, all of which are free to damage your vehicles. The beneficiaries of that are the repair shops.
In Australia we already have a user pays for roads called the commonwealth government excise of 50.8c/l + GST last time I looked. This money allegedly goes back to road maintenance etc. I remain to be convinced.

Why should the same not apply to riding a city bus?

 

[Tigers!]

Public transportation is infrastructure. Infrastructure should be free at point of use, and funded through general taxation, because the users are not the primary beneficiaries.

I agree that public transportation is infrastructure. And while I agree that government should invest in public transportation, I do not think that means that there should not be reasonable fares to use it.

When you drive on city roads, you get the road for "free". Why should the same not apply to riding a city bus?

I don't know about Down Under, but here roads are not paid through general taxation, but through gasoline taxes and registration fees.
Besides, when you use a bus, you not only use city roads but also the equipment as well as the labor of the driver and everybody else involved in transit such as dispatchers and bus mechanics.
Why should not the riders contribute a few bucks then?

Because, as I said, these are not generally things the rider wants. People don't ride city buses for a hobby. They are riding the bus in order to do something else - go to work, go to the shops, go to a show; The bus is part of the infrastructure that enables these economic activities, it is not an economic end in itself, and should have its costs paid by society at large, in rough proportion to the benefits each member society reaps from the existence of infrastructure.

A simple way to approximate who benefits, and by how much, from infrastructure is to look at people's income. Higher income implies more benefits from the existence of infrastructure.

I have often wondered who benefits from the infrastructure of graveyards? Certainly not the persons therein.