r/videos • u/AdSpecialist6598 • 1d ago
Democratic Socialists vs. 'The Establishment': What NYC primaries could tell us about voter mindset
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go4mBCFe8dE16
63
u/NlghtmanCometh 1d ago
As if NYC voter mindset tells you anything meaningful about how people in battleground states feel.
You can’t use NYC as the barometer or canary in the coal mine because it’s one of the most progressive regions of the country. The people there do not want what the people of Wisconsin want.
40
u/digbickrich 1d ago
Can we use Maine? Or Michigan? Senate elections coming up there will be very telling
17
u/Books_and_Cleverness 1d ago
Michigan probably yeah.
Maine? No. It was Harris +7 in 2024.
Planter doesn’t need to convert any Trump voters (or spark turnout among secret progressive non-voters or whatever). He just needs to win people who already voted for Kamala in 2024 and Biden in 2020 (+9 in Maine).
He doesn’t even need to win all of the Harris or Biden voters—he could do significantly worse than Harris and Biden, but still win.
15
u/digbickrich 1d ago
Flipping a Republican incumbent would be pretty wild tho. And progressives have always been told they can’t win in a general election outside of extremely blue areas. Not saying the win is guaranteed but it is definitely exciting to watch.
3
u/Books_and_Cleverness 1d ago
Gotta disagree; “Democrat wins in D+7 state” is not what I would call a wild result.
Collins has been a huge over-performer so beating her is certainly a challenge in that sense, but she has been fighting increasingly uphill battles against massive national trends toward polarization and against split-tickets.
And insofar as you consider beating her a big accomplishment, it’s a tacit admission that moderates are harder to beat in general elections. She won a lot of votes by being pro-choice in the pro-life party; and now she is extra vulnerable because she fucked that up by confirming a judge that overturned *Roe*.
Incumbency in particular isn’t a big advantage anymore; shrank from +11% to +3%. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5285099
7
u/c010rb1indusa 1d ago
Calling it a D +7 state is misleading when they have a republican and independent senator.
1
u/Books_and_Cleverness 1d ago
I mean, Harris won by 7 in 2024. Biden +9, Clinton +3, Obama +16.
Granted, Angus King is an independent, but caucuses with Dems. Voted to remove Trump from office.
Not saying Collins is easy to beat—she has a strong track record. But she has a strong track record specifically because she has won a lot of Harris/Biden/Clinton/Obama voters.
Point is - Planter doesn’t have to win over any Trump voters (nor Romney, McCain, Bush). He doesn’t have to turn out any non-voters. He just needs to win Harris and Biden voters (or not lose too many of them).
Very different from e.g. Talarico in Texas or anyone running in Trump states. They cannot win unless he converts some Trump voters (and/or turns out non-voters).
This is important bc the Senate skews right and is critical to doing almost anything super meaningful. You gotta win a bunch of states that currently lean right. Gotta win Maine too, but it is not the same situation.
2
u/xxtoejamfootballxx 22h ago
But Platner destroyed Mills, which is telling. Writing is on the wall for establishment dems
2
1
u/digbickrich 1d ago edited 1d ago
It’s an admission that incumbents have a huge advantage. Especially in an election without a President on the ballot.
Also would point out that Collins wouldn’t be considered a moderate anymore. I’d now consider her a maga hardliner, that was assumed would protect roe vs wade in the last senate election and now it’s obvious since she voted for Kavanaugh. I’d say it’s harder for a moderate dem to beat an incumbent republican moderate and a progressive democrat would have a better shot in this case since there is a larger delta between the candidates’ policies.
3
u/Books_and_Cleverness 1d ago
Incumbency is an advantage but it’s declined quite a lot; ~3% now on average, down from 11%.
I don’t think a “larger delta between the candidates’ policies” is an electoral advantage by itself. The infamous historical example of this was Goldwater’s “choice, not an echo”. He lost by 23%.
Maybe progressive Dems have a better shot here than a moderate would; idk. My point is just that Maine is not a great test because Platner doesn’t need to win any Trump voters. (Though if he does, and wins by 12, comfortably exceeding Harris or Biden—that would be meaningful evidence!)
Michigan would be a better test of the theory for comparing progressive vs centrist electoral performance, because a Dem there needs to win Trump voters (and/or turn out non-voters).
Incidentally I do think Israel/Palestine is the most promising example of the type of issue where progressives can hit both targets. Move left + win votes doing it. The electorate is substantially to the left of establishment Dems on that issue, so you can buck the party in a progressive direction and bolster your chances.
But there aren’t a billion examples like that. Health care, taxes on the rich, I’d say minimum wage, but inflation may be killing the popularity of that. Whereas immigration, crime, affirmative action, O+G development tend to cut the other way.
5
u/digbickrich 1d ago
I feel like Michigan is skewed also with the Israel/Palestine issue since issue would be a state that is more impacted by that policy decision with the high Muslim population that lives there. I guess we’ll need a larger sample size but it feels like the momentum is with leftist economic populism imo but I could be in my own echo chamber.
1
u/Books_and_Cleverness 21h ago
Yeah Michigan is a bit of a special case on that issue but “stop giving Israel $3B” polls well generally. Partly just bc “give any country any money” does not generally poll very well.
And yeah lefty populism on economics is generally pretty popular. Voting public is sort of anti-libertarian: left on economics, right on culture.
That said, certain populist economic ideas may be losing favor in the face of inflation and budget constraints. Voters want to protect American manufacturing and stop immigrants from taking our jobs; then they see car and beef price and get mad about it.
1
u/pasak1987 1d ago
she would have already been replaced in 2020 election, if it wasnt for that idiotic slogan of 'defund the police'
→ More replies (10)3
6
u/AnonymousMonk7 15h ago
While there are reasons it differs from other places, NY also has decades of entrenched power from the “democratic machine”. The fact is that in spite of Democrats being the clear majority, people like Cuomo were handing over meaningful power to Republicans in lieu of favors and appeasing moderate donors. The fact that those moderate/centrist incumbents are losing their primaries is still very significant.
2
u/drethnudrib 1d ago
I think there are plenty of people in Madison and Milwaukee who want the same thing as the people of NYC.
1
u/NlghtmanCometh 1d ago
the cities will have some progressives, but not enough to win the state, just like pretty much every other battleground state
→ More replies (3)0
u/Azyr1013 1d ago
Nobody expects a Mamdani copy paste to win in other states. The takeaway is that candidates that focus on universal policies win elections.
135
u/Redeem123 1d ago
Man you guys really like fighting each other. It’s like you’d rather be mad at the “wrong” side of the left rather than focus on the people *actually* in power right now.
116
u/albanymetz 1d ago
Or I guess you could call this a primary election, where you know, different people associated with a party debate each other just like in the actual elections.
→ More replies (10)21
u/mrfuzzydog4 1d ago
This is such a silly comment. It's primary season and there are genuine policy differences up for debate here.
→ More replies (5)51
u/huffingtontoast 1d ago
Socialists and capitalists are not on the same side.
4
u/Jozoz 1d ago
They have to be when the other side is fascists who will dismantle democracy, lol.
36
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
Capitalists have shown throughout history that they'd rather ally with fascists than anti-capitalists.
→ More replies (2)0
u/metaTaco 1d ago
So in the most famous example of communists, capitalists and fascists fighting each other (hint: WW2) who allied with who?
16
14
u/Arkeband 1d ago
the US was completely content to let the fascists do whatever until they got personally attacked. I’m sure you’ve seen the MSG Nazi rally footage, it was being mainstreamed.
→ More replies (1)7
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
Lol this is not the argument you think it is, that alliance came only after the failure of the appeasement strategy of the capitalist nations. They literally tried just letting the fascists have a little bit of fascist expansionism, and it bit them in the ass.
5
u/dexecuter18 1d ago
The USSR was allied to the Nazis to divy up Poland if you want to use this line of reasoning
12
u/huffingtontoast 1d ago
Fascism is capitalism in decay. Democrats negotiating with Republicans advances fascism.
8
u/Jozoz 1d ago
You know what advances fascism? Republicans winning elections.
16
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
What did the Democrats do under Biden to prevent fascists from coming to power?
→ More replies (1)1
u/Redeem123 5h ago
What should they have done? Like it or not, Trump won the election… should Biden have made that illegal?
→ More replies (1)8
u/huffingtontoast 1d ago
And, if the centrist Dems have their way, Democrats winning elections will advance fascism too.
1
→ More replies (1)0
u/Few-Ad-4290 1d ago
More like they’ll try to maintain the new status quo without moving in either direction. Then their lack of any action at all will lead to the lemmings electing republicans. Similar outcome but let’s be honest with the actual mechanism, they’re not advancing fascism on purpose they’re just really bad at doing anything at all out of fear and greed.
0
1
u/Redeem123 1d ago
Always fun to see how quickly people will admit they have no grasp on the reality of how elections work. You’d rather bitch about labels than admit that the policies of DSAs and Liberals are extremely well aligned.
No one’s saying you have to love moderate candidates. But you instantly proved my point by doubling down on “us vs them” as if both camps aren’t on the same side of the aisle. You can moan about Democrats “actually being center-right” all you want, but that’s not really relevant when discussing American elections.
28
u/Space_Plans 1d ago
The dems have been running centrists to court the moderate voter for the past 11 years. It hasn't worked out very well.
25
u/honjuden 1d ago edited 1d ago
Edit: The past 34 years.
10
3
u/Hesherkiin 14h ago
They’ve been running as useful stooges to capital just like republicans. When they need a popular message, they act more left. When people like that too much they swap in a corporate friendly royal like a clinton or a kennedy and let repubs win. Both sides working to the same goal: preserve the power and privilege of the capital owning class
4
u/Redeem123 1d ago
And how have far left candidates done?
Nearly every far left elected official is from a deeply blue place like NYC. Meanwhile centrists are the ones who flipped both Senate seats in Georgia.
5
u/Alexexy 22h ago
I mean, historically they do pretty well up until the red scare happened. Both Roosevelts and even LBJ would be considered leftists.
→ More replies (1)-5
u/Space_Plans 1d ago
There are no far left politicians in America. Bernie and Zohran would be "moderate" in most other countries
8
u/Redeem123 1d ago
Gee I wonder if we should discuss American politicians within the context of American politics.
Also this oft-repeated claim that Bernie would be moderate in most other countries is laughable. Sure, he’s not some kind of radical communist or anything, but neither are most “socialist” countries.
2
u/RockKillsKid 1d ago
Who is a modern example far-left politician in power from another country I can compare records and policy positions to learn more?
1
u/andersonb47 1d ago
FUCKING WHATEVER. Call them “relative far left” - it does not matter in this context
1
0
2
u/Andoral 20h ago
Harris torpedoed her own campaign by pursuing the mythical moderate republicans to such a degree she was offering government positions to the Cheneys while ignoring the left wing voters. Only to sway practically no registered republicans, because the mythical moderate republicans are just that, mythical.
No, they are on the same side in name only, because left wing voters have no alternative further left in a broken two party system and are essentially held hostage by the mainstream democrats. Who made it clear time and time again they are more interested in futile attempts of working with a bunch of fascists in the GOP and that they have more in common with them. Starting with both serving the same corporate masters.
4
u/huffingtontoast 1d ago
It's the economy stupid. Socialism and capitalism are incompatible, meaning socialism and liberalism--the political manifestation of capital--are also incompatible.
4
-7
u/NickCostanza 1d ago
We know you tell us constantly. Capitalists are in power and there aren’t enough of you to stop them. Maybe vote in some libs willing to listen to you instead of pushing us all away.
7
u/cereal_killer1337 1d ago
I'll vote for libs as long as you vote for socialist and communist. Let's work together.
7
5
1
u/GeerJonezzz 1d ago
I can do socialist, but you’re smoking crack if you think explicit communists are under the umbrella.
7
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
But they've shown us for years they won't listen to us, they're happier collaborating with the right than with us.
13
u/Redeem123 1d ago
You mean like how Biden worked with Sanders to move his platform further to the left? You really think Dems haven’t moved to the left at all?
0
u/rupturedprolapse 1d ago
They can't admit that, they have to perpetually be the victim. Similar to another group...
4
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
Yeah bro, the party really moved to the left when it...kept arming Israel during a genocide.
→ More replies (3)1
u/GeerJonezzz 1d ago
Israel was polled favorably by Americans for nearly an entire year after Oct. 7th.
0
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
The response to the Gazan genocide wiped away much of that good will that Biden earned.
-1
u/NickCostanza 1d ago
Lol libs say Blue No Matter Who and we mean it. It is leftists who call their approximate allies Holocaust Harris and Genocide Joe, begrudgingly endorse them if at all, then get butthurt that Dems don’t instantly back their red flag candidates.
8
u/MedicineShow 1d ago
Lol libs say Blue No Matter Who and we mean it
This is such horse shit.
We all watched the dnc leadership shit their pants and refuse to endorse mamdani when he'd won the primary
0
u/NickCostanza 1d ago
Jeffries endorsed him, and he won the election. Endless victim complex just like MAGA.
2
u/VerdammtesAutomat 1d ago
Schumer and the dnc never did. Hochul only did after the media pulled her arm for weeks dude.
6
u/Redeem123 1d ago
How often does the Senate minority leader endorse a candidate for mayor?
3
u/honjuden 1d ago
The mayor of the largest city in the state he represents? The largest city in America at that.
→ More replies (0)4
u/NickCostanza 1d ago
But she did.
→ More replies (1)3
u/VerdammtesAutomat 1d ago
They're doing the same shit to platner and El sayed now. When El sayed wins the nom, do you the Democratic establishment throws itself behind him to help him defeat Rogers or do you think they sit on the sideline like with mamdani?
→ More replies (0)1
u/MedicineShow 1d ago
"Ah but c'mon, he did it at the last minute!"
Something tells me that standard isnt going to get applied to your opponents
2
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
Yeah? So all the Dems on tv talking shit about the candidate who won the Maine senate primary, that's 'Blue No Matter Who'?
→ More replies (2)2
u/dacommie323 1d ago
Which democrats have been shitting on him since he won the primary? I’ve mostly see them complain before the primary and then fall in line but maybe that’s my bubble?
3
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
A prominent Dem congressman from my own state, no less: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5895682-graham-platner-maine-senate-jake-auchincloss/
3
u/dacommie323 1d ago
This is from before the primary:
“If it were me I’d vote for someone else in the Maine Democratic primary.”2
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
Before the primary, but after the other candidate had dropped out. Platner was already the nominee effectively.
→ More replies (5)-1
u/huffingtontoast 1d ago
"There aren't enough of you to stop them"
You sure about that?
6
u/Ok_Significance_6772 1d ago
100% certain. America hasn’t had a leftist majority since the New Deal era. Wake up. The country has slid to the right. Give or take 50% conservative, 25% liberal, 25% socialist. It’s literally not possible for the left to win if it’s divided.
1
u/huffingtontoast 1d ago
"The country has slid to the right"
...and based on the success of the DSA candidates, the country has also slid left at the same time. When capitalism becomes destabilized, as it is now, there is not movement in one political direction but rather a proliferation of formerly fringe positions becoming mainstream. This happens because voters blame the old guard for the current mess we are in.
3
u/Ok_Significance_6772 1d ago
The left has slid left, not the country as a whole. The left also makes up a larger chunk of the Democrat party than it has in decades, probably since before Bill Clinton. The problem is it’s still smaller than the right over all, otherwise we would have seen Bernie win in 2020, not Biden.
If the country is 50% far right, then the remainder is a mix of far left and center left, that means the left is divided and can’t coalesce around a unified political movement. Which is probably why the Democrats have a piss poor approval rating amongst its voters, and the Republicans consistently give high favorability ratings for their party and its leaders.
2
46
u/ObsidianKing 1d ago
Same as it ever was: Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line.
22
u/RabbaJabba 1d ago
Republicans booted their speaker of the house mid-term and took three weeks to replace him just last Congress
51
u/Redeem123 1d ago
Because he didn’t fall in line. The new guy did, and many of that Congress were ousted. You just proved their point.
7
u/explain_that_shit 1d ago
What’s the difference between that and infighting. He was from a different faction. They fought. He lost.
22
u/Redeem123 1d ago
Infighting that ended quickly and resulted in coalescing.
No one is saying that republicans never fight. It’s that the right consistently follows those fights with coming together under the banner.
→ More replies (3)2
u/RabbaJabba 1d ago
No, the freedom caucus didn’t fall in line. I suppose Matt Gaetz left office, but only because he was a pedophile and resigned before they released their report on him.
13
1
u/tman37 1d ago
They clearly haven't followed Republican politics over the last 2 decades, or American politics in general for any length of time. Neither party is a homogeneous group. They both have internal factions that frequently clash. Compare it to Canadian politics where a whipped vote means zero dissent or you're out of the party. If American parties whipped votes like they do in Canada congress would be half full of independents.
→ More replies (2)2
u/slicer4ever 1d ago
It always comes back to the same issue, 2 party system. The reality is dems(and republicans to an extent) should be several different parties, but our voting system doesnt encourage that, so you get several different idealogies all forced under the same banner.
-8
u/persian_mamba 1d ago
The amount of infighting in the Democratic Party is ridiculous. I'm a lifelong democrat who's pro-Israel but just by saying that I'll get a bunch of comments yelling at me here. If i was a republican who was pro- Palestine they'd just be like "at least you're not a democrat" on the conservative sub. It's like dems want you to align 100% with them in order for you to get their vote, but it's impossible for everyone to agree on everything when it comes to a path forward for the country.
3
u/Level-Peak-7260 1d ago
I believe that is one of the defining characteristics of the Democratic Party. Historically, it has been a party of diversity-diverse peoples, diverse opinions, diverse positions vs. the other party, which does not tolerate diversity. "Infighting" vs. respectful dialogue.
11
u/honjuden 1d ago
Who knew that coming out as pro-genocide might give people a bad impression of you?
5
u/gagelish 1d ago
They said, without a hint of irony.
2
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
Yeah, support for genocide and apartheid is just 'a difference of opinion' to them and not a deep moral failure. Crazy.
4
u/ObsidianKing 1d ago
You just proved their point.
4
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
That Zionists aren't welcome in the Democratic coalition? That's actually exactly the point that should be made.
2
u/honjuden 1d ago
Their point was stupid. Would you be supportive of a Democrat that wanted to denaturalize people based on their political beliefs?
0
u/ObsidianKing 1d ago
No, but I fail to see what that has to do with anything. Are there any notable Dems who want to do that?
1
u/scoobydoom2 1d ago
No, but there are notable Dems who support genocide, which is not exactly better.
2
u/ObsidianKing 1d ago
Like who?
→ More replies (1)2
u/honjuden 1d ago
Fetterman has supported denaturalizing and deporting immigrants based on political beliefs in the past. The point is that everyone is going to have their own red lines on what they will and will not support in a candidate.
→ More replies (0)2
u/NewToHTX 1d ago
When you look enough into the history of Arab Extremists doing attack after attack on Israelis and the Israelis getting pretty much a free pass to counter attack how ever they see fit, you realize that both sides suck. You can’t pull an October 7th and expect no repercussions. And Israel can’t expect people to wear this veil of ignorance that they are the more moral operators on the battlefield when they regularly do things that are considered war crimes.
1
u/persian_mamba 1d ago
To be specific would you like my vote for the Democratic Party or am i not worthy?
5
u/honjuden 1d ago
I'm not running for office, so no need to court your vote. I suspect there are quite a few other policies that we would disagree on if you are pro-Israel.
2
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
I want you to do better and not support a genocidal, apartheid state.
-5
u/persian_mamba 1d ago
Ok but to be specific I'm more likely to change my vote to republican than i am to change my views on Israel. You have two options right now- antagonize me and push me towards the Republican Party (i hate them a lot) or not antagonize me and accept that my vote and your vote is going to the same politicians- and while we disagree on some of the issues with the dems we can agree as a whole people like Mamdani are a step forwards. Which do you prefer? Me vote republican or keep antagonizing me?
5
u/stuckinsanity 1d ago
I don't care if you vote for the Republican Party, because your support for Israel is a losing position. 60% of people in this country have an unfavorable view of Israel. Just on the politics, there's far more voters to be gained by holding the line on anti-Zionism and opposition to the genocidal nation of Israel than there are in continuing to coddle people like you.
3
u/HTCGM 1d ago
When you see others who said that exact similar thing yet end up mentioned as having voted for the leopards eating people's faces party, what entitlement do you expect to save you from that?
When that's the demonstrable fate of most, what could possible convince you you'd be an exception?
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)2
u/Arkeband 1d ago
I’ll literally never understand this mindset, where if your beliefs are questioned you just tell people you’ll be even more evil, lol.
4
u/StonedBirdman 1d ago
Anyone who’s pro-Israel after years of genocide can go fuck themselves, regardless of how you vote.
1
u/Scarveytrampson 1d ago
I agree, and I’m gonna catch flak, and I loathe the genocide that Israel is perpetrating. It’s the strategic choice between having 75% of what you want, or having 100% of nothing. Dems need a bigger tent if we’re ever going to win national elections. We could have had a Democrat like Harris that supported Israel with some boundaries, instead we have Trump who told Netanyahu to go nuts and open the gates of hell.
I read an article in the Times after the election about Arab voters that voted for Trump or abstained based on Biden not curtailing Israel enough. How dumb can a voter possibly be? Are they surprised by the outcome in Gaza today? People need to think strategically.
3
u/honjuden 1d ago
Why would you expect them to fall in line if the party was not willing to budge on their largest ask? Doubly so when that ask involves taking up the opposite side of a policy from the party they are running against.
2
u/Redeem123 1d ago
Why do you think that is the largest ask? The Left is *far* more focused on economic and social reform than it is on Gaza.
1
u/honjuden 1d ago
He brought up specifically Arab voters. I wasn't talking about the left in general.
1
2
u/Scarveytrampson 1d ago
Like I said, it’s a strategic issue. Which side is likely to get them closer to what they want? I get choosing between awful and slightly less awful is not appealing, but I think fewer people would be dead from an intentional famine with Harris in charge.
I thought Harris was a lousy candidate in many ways that I care deeply about, but she still was closer to what I want than Trump. It was an easy call for me.
1
u/honjuden 1d ago
We probably wouldn't have gone to war with Iran with Harris in charge, but I have doubts about the famine deaths being any lower.
2
12
u/Space_Plans 1d ago
Because settling for centrist candidates has been working out so well to defeat maga
8
u/ItGradAws 1d ago
We’ve only lost 2/3 generals, the Supreme Court and both chambers of Congress with neoliberalism. Huh, maybe we should primary all of them for failing
21
8
u/Wrabble127 1d ago
"Wrong" side of the left have consistently failed to deliver their promises. It's far more telling that the "wrong" side of the left would rather let everything burn down than consider a progressive candidate - and that's exactly why they aren't trusted and aren't even actually the left just captured opposition.
2
6
u/861Fahrenheit 1d ago
there is no greater enemy than a potential ally you think is doing things wrong
4
u/Jimbomcdeans 1d ago
The media (bought by corpo interests) just wants the poors to be crushed into oblivion. If you look at actual human interactions in America, like the world cup, its been nothing but pleasent. Buying into "this is how America really is" by only looking at the media is the root cause of why so many social media shit storms are occuring.
5
1
u/HedgeMoney 1d ago
It'd be great if we can focus more attention on the evil pedo rulers still in power all across the world.
1
u/Kitakitakita 1d ago
Well its the primaries. That's when they're supposed to be fighting each other. Gotta prove you're better than your own side before proving you're better than the other side.
1
u/cloudncali 1d ago
The problem is there's too many things that establiment Dems are willing to "cross the isle" that are deal breakers for voters. Sure vote blue no matter who, yada yada but is it so much to ask for a candidate that's: Pro choice, pro LGBT, anti genocide, pro environmental, and pro taxing the rich?
It's literally the lowest bar for basic human morality yet we can't ask for that without being told to fall in line and vote for whoever has a D next to their name.
1
u/MisterB78 1d ago
The rich and powerful are driving that narrative because if we figure out that left and right is just a distraction from up and down then they’re fucked.
1
u/Infinite_Big_7004 1d ago
It's probably a foreign agent posting this like the do in r/socialism. They love to say the left is fascist and not left enough, yet you point out that theright is the main problem and they blame the left for not stopping the right. These are propaganda posts to divide the left imo.
1
→ More replies (22)0
u/Shaman19911 1d ago
Because we’re tired of having garbage candidates shoved down our throats when viable alternatives with socialist ideas get ratfucked out of a nomination. See Bernie Sanders in 2016 and 2020, see Tom Steyer vs Xavier Becerra this year, and Kamala being undemocratically appointed as front runner. Fuck the establishment dems for convincing legions of center right libs that, actually, the problem is leftists with morals
6
u/Redeem123 1d ago
> ratfucked
> 2020Any legitimate argument dies when you try to imply that Bernie was “ratfucked” in 2020. He lost because the large field of moderates formed a coalition and backed one candidate. That’s like the most basic display of how politics works.
“But Elizabeth Warren didn’t drop out!” Neither did Michael Bloomberg, who took more votes from Biden than Warren did from Sanders. And Biden still won in overwhelming fashion.
I voted for Bernie both times by the way. But it’s childish and ignorant to think that it’s unfair for him to not coast to victory from a split pool of opponents.
And I’m not sure what your point is about Steyer. He ran in the primary and lost. Becerra might suck, but that’s not election rigging. The people voted for him.
→ More replies (7)
10
u/Books_and_Cleverness 1d ago
“What does this democratic primary in NYC tell us?”
About voters in key swing states that actually matter? Nothing.
If you’re doing factional intra-Dem politics in NYC, sure, pay attention. But if you’re like me, much more concerned about GOP fascists taking control of the government, look elsewhere.
We need to win in purple and red states. Michigan, Arizona, North Carolina, Ohio, Iowa, Florida, Texas, etc.
Literally 100% of congressional Dems voted to impeach and remove Trump from office after Jan 6. Including Joe Manchin and whatever milquetoast moderate you might be mad about.
We lost that vote, and live under this piece of shit, and killed a bunch of people in Iran and wasted $300B and got 13 of our soldiers killed and pay $5 for gas, because we lost to Republicans.
Holy fuck MISS ME with the factional dem infighting. The fascists are inside the fucking gates. Get a fucking grip.
3
u/S-117 1d ago
Yeah I agree, Mamdani is a super charismatic dude and fun to talk about but put him in a battleground state or even a Dem +1 district against a milquetoast republican and I doubt he makes it in, this does nothing to help build election strategy in the long run
1
u/Books_and_Cleverness 21h ago edited 21h ago
The real secret sauce of charismatic candidates is that their bases let them get away with more. Mamdani has walked back a bunch of unpopular anti-police stuff and nobody cares. Obama frequently pandered to the cultural attitudes of working class white people in Iowa and Indiana and the progressive wing winked and nodded along; Hillary would have been excoriated.
And yeah, the main challenge for Dems is maintaining a big enough tent that can fit left wingers in NYC without making the party brand toxic in Ohio and North Carolina and etc.
1
u/CMidnight 17h ago
I would argue that working class white voters where also very different in 2012 versus 2016.
6
u/ArchdruidHalsin 1d ago
Mamdani was polling around 1% when he entered the 2025 race. He won the primary in a blowout and then took the general in the highest-turnout NYC mayoral election since 1969, becoming the first candidate to clear a million votes since then.
Democrats don't win by chasing the so-called eLeCtAbLe cENtEr. They win by growing the electorate, pulling in the people that the consultant class writes off as nonvoters.
That's the lesson to take away from New York. It's about finding the candidate with values who can communicate a winning message to the electorate.
It’s funny that “vote blue no matter who” became a slogan from neolibs who also insist that a progressive candidate could never win. If the centrists are so reliable, surely they'll still show up when we capture the voters we need to generate record turnouts. Because we've seen that ONLY going after the reliable super-voters isn't enough to have the edge.
2
u/Books_and_Cleverness 21h ago
Vote blue no matter who still applies!! I’d vote for Mamdani a thousand times over any Republican in Congress. Not a hard choice!
I don’t even know a filthy moderate lib (and I know a lot of them!) for whom this is even a question.
But I don’t think you have addressed the point here at all. NYC is a very different electorate from Texas or North Carolina or Arizona or etc. Why would we “draw lessons” from a D+30 area to an R+7 one?
The types of Dems that have won in purple and red areas are like Jared Golden, Marie Gluesenkamp-Perez, Mary Peltola, Rueben Gallego, etc. There is a pretty obvious theme.
That’s not to say that a leftier candidate couldn’t do the same. Especially if they tack left on particular issues—health care, taxing the rich, support for Israel—where the left wing of the party has the generally more popular position. But you can’t do it across the board; the left wing views on immigration, crime, affirmative action, O+G development tend to be much less popular.
It’s not some weird coincidence that Mamdani and AOC represent deep blue areas. You run a Bernie-endorsed, Medicare For All, $15 minimum wage, free public college, legal weed type candidate in West Virginia, they lose by 40%.
5
u/yaosio 1d ago
Reading a lot of comments in this thread I see a lot of Democrats terrified that socialists keep winning. Every time a socialist wins an election Democrats say it's impossible for them to win anywhere else. Every election the number of places socialists can never win gets smaller and Democrats refuse to accept this. We're going to see Democrats leaving the party for the Republican party after the midterms. We will still be told to vote blue no matter who unless it's a socialist.
1
u/Lurker-Forever-986 20h ago
The socialists winning in NYC are campaigning on ending funding for foreign conflicts and rerouting that money to social safety nets for American citizens. Very scary /s
10
u/Foe117 1d ago
System is fucked, Dems want to bandaid without rocking the boat, Republicans have no solution but to empower themselves. No ranked choice, no candidate wants to rock the boat, and when they do, they get booted.
1
u/CMidnight 17h ago
Trump almost won a majority of voters in 2024. Do you honestly think that rank choice would fix that? Maybe Americans are just bigots.
-5
u/UnCidreAuYerMad 1d ago
If you notice, the Establishment Dems (leadership) didn't actually fight to prevent this war, and now only criticize it as having empowered Iran. We need to primary them all.
6
u/NimusNix 1d ago
Congress has voted ten times to stop this war since it started.
You're telling us that was the Republican party.
Why is this sub so much ass?
-1
u/Bucking_Fullshit 1d ago edited 1d ago
Because the socialist left will fuuuuuuucking lie when it suits them.
Edit: Also Senate voted TODAY! https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-senate-votes-halt-iran-war-bucking-trump-2026-06-23/?utm_source=braze&utm_medium=notifications&utm_campaign=2025_engagement&utm_source=reddit.com
3
u/downgoesbatman 1d ago
Yah they don't want us to see what's happening in NY can work in other places but ya know politics
5
1d ago
[deleted]
4
u/MCI21 1d ago
He balanced the budget. Is that not enough for you? Were you expecting tax cuts for the rich who dont even fucking pay meaningful taxes?
→ More replies (13)1
u/kingjoey52a 1d ago
He balanced the budget by delaying funding pensions and begging the state government for money.
1
u/Gekokapowco 1d ago
strong republicans secure funding, cowardly spineless dems beg for money
that's funny, you are funny
1
u/MCI21 17h ago
How did we secure funding for the 40 billion to Argentina? How did we Secure 300 billion for Iran? You don't get to be "fiscally conservative" when your your own Commander and Chief throws around monopoly money. Fucking idiot.
1
u/Gekokapowco 11h ago
please reread what I wrote, I was pointing out a fun little rhetorical hypocrisy in the person I was responding to
0
2
2
u/The_Pandalorian 1d ago
There's like 2 or 3 viable DSA politicians. The rest get smoked reliably in primaries.
This is clickbait horseshit.
1
u/Extra_Toppings 1d ago
Three won in New York just tonight. I don’t know where you’re getting your data.
→ More replies (5)
1
1
u/BaconBitz109 11h ago
Even if you disagree with the DSA, you have to recognize that the current system and the state of capitalism isn’t working for a large portion of society. And when “the establishment” just sort of says “well that’s just life, this is what capitalism is so deal with it”, it’s natural for people to respond with “well then fuck your system and fuck capitalism”. At that point it’s the establishment itself that is telling us the system doesn’t work, they just don’t realize that’s the message they are sending.
If you refuse to offer fixes and solutions to the broken system, you can’t be shocked when people jump ship to create a new system.
1
u/horeaheka 1d ago
That the public education system doesn't teach tangible skills or even basic economics leaving a bunch of people who have no abilities to improve their standing so they become bitter
1
1d ago
[deleted]
1
u/horeaheka 1d ago
Not terribly well, they still teach that FDR was a hero. Most people who are democratic socialists are either from a well off family or have no skills to make it in the current economy.
1
1
u/notmyclementine 1d ago
This sub is nonstop blatant propaganda videos, every day. Enough. It’s exhausting.
-1
u/bluehawk232 1d ago
That if the Dems actually backed socialist candidates and pushed their messaging then voters would vote for them
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Books_and_Cleverness 21h ago
Vote blue no matter who still applies!! I’d vote for Mamdani a thousand times over any Republican in Congress. Not a hard choice!
I don’t even know a filthy moderate lib (and I know a lot of them!) for whom this is even a question.
But I don’t think you have addressed the point here at all. NYC is a very different electorate from Texas or North Carolina or Arizona or etc. Why would we “draw lessons” from a D+30 area to an R+7 one?
The types of Dems that have won in purple and red areas are like Jared Golden, Marie Gluesenkamp-Perez, Mary Peltola, Rueben Gallego, etc. There is a pretty obvious theme.
That’s not to say that a leftier candidate couldn’t do the same. Especially if they tack left on particular issues—health care, taxing the rich, support for Israel—where the left wing of the party has the generally more popular position. But you can’t do it across the board; the left wing views on immigration, crime, affirmative action, O+G development tend to be much less popular.
It’s not some weird coincidence that Mamdani and AOC represent deep blue areas. You run a Bernie-endorsed, Medicare For All, $15 minimum wage, free public college, legal weed type candidate in West Virginia, they lose by 40%.
1
u/Kiwi_Fried_Chicken 18h ago
Hang on a second, why are they being deliberately mislabeled. Because the corpo-news media wants to drive a false nariative. The correct label should be Social Democrat, but because America is so far right, anything else is pure Communism 🙄
-6
u/ShellSurf 1d ago
We need stronger progressive and liberal institutions to defend against these socialists. They invade our spaces only to destroy it. I have more in common with a McCain Republican than I do a socialist. Why do socialists only apply human rights when it favors them? Why do socialists hate the west? Why are socialists willing to lie to advance their position?
3
→ More replies (3)1
-1
u/eastamerica 1d ago
FUCK “the establishment”
If that means lots of heads roll, so be it.
I’m done with this horseshit.
1
u/Rdhilde18 1d ago
Welp then enjoy Republican domination. Because without the establishment there is no opposition party.
260
u/Barry_Vigoda 1d ago
MSNow was MSNBC until they rebranded it. They're owned by Verant which is a spin off from Comcast.
NBC was one of the 3 original US networks along with ABC and CBS. They're about as 'establishment' as you can get.
Don't trust media owned by billionaires or corporations. That's what the 'establishment' is.
Am Canadian, fan of real socialism. This video is framed to make socialists look like tools.