When the best hope is that an elected official is ineffective, we have a problem.
Mamdani being the Democrat nominee of New York City’s mayor is a huge problem.
Will NYC elect a socialist mayor?
- Thread starter BradStevens
- Start date
Mamdani being the Democrat nominee of New York City’s mayor is a huge problem.
Not at all. Trump is mainstream Republican. You don’t like his personality. That’s different.
Oh, I don't disagree. And as tempting as it is to say "Well, that's NYC. I don't live there, their voters do, and it's their prerogative to elect who they want....I'm insulated from the effects here in Indiana", I don't think that's entirely the case.
I'd be more inclined to think that if he had been elected the mayor of Cedar Rapids. But what happens in our major cities is pretty impactful. Because they're also major components of our national economic engine. The entire nation is better off if NYC, LA, Chicago, etc. are thriving.
My man.
Snake PLISSKEN
Put some respect on that man's name.
Also, as is my wont, Escape From NY is DYING for a modern remake. Ryan Gosling as Snake. Fight me.
Not at all. He is the mirror image of a normal democracy. You act as if Momdani is really woke. He is much, much different and worse.
While I'm with you on some of the things you're saying, I think Marvin's more right than you're realizing.
Trump led a populist revolt within the Republican Party -- primarily, but not wholly, on the issue of immigration. Zohran is also a populist (albeit of a different stripe) and could well represent a similar upheaval in the Democratic Party.
BS. I have posted MANY times the opinions of Buckley on populism and how Buckley got Reagan to agree to keep populists out of power. Back when you pretended to be mainstream Republican you mentioned Ike was your favorite. From Google AI:
Evidence suggests that Dwight D. Eisenhower had a strong aversion to certain aspects of populism, particularly those associated with exclusion and intolerance. He staunchly opposed the populist "Know Nothing" movement, which sought to curb immigration in his time.
Beyond specific movements, Eisenhower's governing style and philosophy, known as Modern Republicanism, emphasized a moderate approach that balanced individual freedom with government assistance where needed. He aimed to navigate "down the middle of the road," avoiding both the excesses of concentrated wealth and the dangers of extreme partisan interests or statism. This approach contrasts with the potentially divisive nature often associated with certain forms of populism.
Furthermore, his actions regarding Senator Joseph McCarthy, whom he reportedly "loathed," suggest a deliberate effort to counter the senator's influence and the brand of populist fear-mongering he embodied, though he chose not to publicly confront McCarthy. This demonstrates a strategic opposition to at least one prominent figure associated with populist sentiment in his era.
In summary, while the sources don't explicitly state that Eisenhower "hated" populism in general, they indicate a clear opposition to specific populist movements and a preference for a more moderate and inclusive political approach, which could be interpreted as a dislike for the negative aspects of populism.
I am FAR closer to Ike than Trump is. It has nothing to do with personality, populism was not GOP until Trump. Buckley died in 2008, so yes, until about a generation ago populists had little power in the GOP. Then people like his disciple, George Will, were kicked out.
I don’t agree, there is no left and right populism. Marx focused on class disparity, but he was by no means a populist.
Last edited:
That is spot on, wealth and political power are two sides of the same coin. Heck, look at the ire of the right, corporations often fall into it. They aren't the political elite. The idea that the wealthy are not elite is ludicrous on its face. We shouldn't look to punish the "elite" no matter the definition of wealth or government service.
I am not happy Mamdani won. I wouldn't vote for him if I were in NYC, not that Adams is a whole lot better given the corruption. But there are a lot of people who feel they aren't being heard and that the system doesn't represent them. They turned out in big numbers. Someone needs a way of reaching them on the right and left that doesn't involve, "hey, we have an enemy in this country that is screwing you."
“Populism” like “elits” has many different meanings and contexts. My quarrel is with your position that “screw the elites” is a bedrock of populism. Let’s stick with that. Finding common ground with populist positions in today’s world is not in Joe McCarthy territory.
From the populism angle, I agree. Large swaths of both parties are pissed off and looking for something new (by the way the broken money is causing this).
However, from a policy standpoint they're drastically different. Trump is a centrist on economic policies. Most of it is pro-growth and normal stuff. Socialism is batshit crazy far left policies that end up destroying societies. Socialism is starting to become one of the greatest threats to the U.S.
Allah doesn’t allow for separation of church & state….
There's definitely something to what you're saying. There are some key similarities between what Trump represents and what Zohran represents.
But I'd quibble with that Google AI snippet in a couple important ways.
First, it was the Eisenhower Administration (and its AG, Herbert Brownell) that implemented "Operation Wetback." That doesn't necessarily mean that Ike was anti-immigration. The pressure to act, then as now, had to do with illegal immigration. And I think it's very important to recognize that distinction.
Second, I've never defended Joseph McCarthy's tactics. But, at the end of the day, he was entirely correct that critical American institutions had been infiltrated by Soviet spies. So I think it's off-target to chalk up the "Red Scare" period as mere "populist fear-mongering."
It gets conflated with persecuting people merely for holding communist beliefs. And I think that was regrettable -- albeit understandable in the context of a Cold War where we actually did have enemies in our midst.
The immigration issue isn't an example of populism. It's an example of a shitty economic policy for the middle and working classes. Trump was smart enough to recognize it, unlike all the Bush era idiot politicians. They were more concerned about pumping their own bags.
Last edited:
I hit like when I started to read this but retracted when I read the remake comment. I could almost be convinced a remake might work but As good as Gosling is he lacks the edge needed to be Snake & more importantly is Canadian. Let’s rumble…
Fascinating. The laptop class supported Mamdani even though his message is aimed largely at lower income.
Guilt is a helluva drug...
Kurt Russell was near perfect in roles requiring badassery, general annoyance, and comedy. It's tough.
But, for now, Gosling is as good as it gets.
There's a critical distinction to be recognized, though. And it's this: wealthy people and corporations have a more limited amount of power over our lives than do those in the political class.
I don't want to say that they have no power over us, that wouldn't be accurate. But it's limited. And that is because we all possess a lot of capacity to refuse any interaction with them, to dance to their tune.
Some people reject this. They'll say "But I don't have any choice except to work for rich people." Well that's nonsense -- most jobs in this country are produced by small/medium businesses. And anybody who simply can't abide working for others (my brother is one of these people) can pretty easily become self-employed.
Or...if you resent Wal-Mart, as many do, there are plenty of other places you can patronize. Being in the union world, I personally know numerous people who refuse to shop there. And there's nothing the Walton family, however wealthy they are, can do about it.
I think a lot of the resentment people have for wealthy people stems from a misunderstanding. And the misunderstanding is that the more money rich people have, the less money the rest of us have. That they've gotten richer by making others poorer -- be it their employees, their customers, their shareholders, their vendors, etc.
The political elite, on the other hand, holds much more power over us. I can choose not to shop at Wal-Mart. I cannot choose to, for instance, decline participation in Social Security.
It's the very definition of populism.
Here's Wikipedia's opening paragraph on it:
Populism is a contested concept used to refer to a variety of political stances that emphasize the idea of the "common people" and often position this group in opposition to a perceived elite. It is frequently associated with anti-establishment and anti-political sentiment. The term developed in the late 19th century and has been applied to various politicians, parties, and movements since that time, often assuming a pejorative tone. Within political science and other social sciences, several different definitions of populism have been employed, with some scholars proposing that the term be rejected altogether.
Trump and Zohran are different brands of populist, obviously. But both of them have utilized messaging that is designed to harness the angst among "common people" having "position(ed) this group in opposition to a perceived elite."That goofball isn’t nearly cool enough, & again, Canadian.Ryan Reynolds has entered the chat...
Mandami is focused on free stuff for the poor. That is not populism.
Last edited:
Sure it is. That's the standard left-wing version of populism. "Rich people are screwing you so they can have a bigger yacht. I'll tax the hell out of them and use the funds to provide things for you. They're your enemy, I'm your savior."
That's what populism is, in a left-wing frame.
That would be a good choice for Snake in my opinion. Ryan can get gritty can't he?
These two terms are not mutually exclusive.
Marxism is an economic philosophy. Populism is a political messaging strategy. The latter can be (and often is) used to advance the former.
T
No let them have this guy. If they think NYC is expensive now just wait until the tax increases to fund all of his free stuff. You most certainly get what you vote for and the rich liberal elites voted for him.
Donald Trump enjoyed grabbing women by the pussy. Its the only thing thats normal the last 16-20 years... Obama grabbed dudes by the D, Biden grabbed kids by only god knows who, and President Donald Trump likes to grab a woman by the p*ssy. You probably are mad he didnt wear a mask while doing it.
If we’re going to allow foreigners to play him, might as well go with Collin Farrell, or Tom Burke(the Aussie who played Praetorian Jack in Furiosa) kinda has it too but maybe not a big enough name for a larger than life character like that. I’ve got Pedro Pascal fatigue, but he showed in The Last of Us that quiet steeliness Snake must have. Thought about Bernthal but he’s too animated. Boyd Holbrook?
It isn't going to matter if the Republican (is it Sliwa again?) stays in or drops out. Mamdani is going to win this race comfortably. Adams is finished, for several reasons.
Socialist “tendencies?”His socialist tendencies lean into the "stick it to the elite," which is a bedrock of populism. It was Trump's message. The elites are doing terrible things and I (Mamdani/Trump) will put an end to it.
It appears he did really well with youth and others who do not typically vote. He brought in the marginal Democrats to defeat the Democratic machine. I recall someone on the right doing that in 2016 with marginal Republicans.
Why establishment Democrats still can’t stomach progressive candidates like Zohran Mamdani | Arwa Mahdawi
The anti-Mamdani mobilization is depressingly predictable, with a party that is allergic to fresh blood and new thinkingwww.theguardian.com
And just to point it out, there are people much further left than Mamdani:
Communist group slams Mamdani for ‘deceiving working class,’ making ‘false promises’
The Revolutionary Communists of America ripped the Democratic Socialist mayoral candidate in an article called “Why Communists Can’t Support Zohran Mamdani.”www.aol.com
He’s a member of the DSA. His policies and ideology are much different than Trump’s.
Given CoHs reading preferences, I’m skeptical he’s read the Politics.
Plato is the more recognized critic of democracy. No
No, it’s not.
I think these polling #s tell the whole, unfortunate story.
Lowlifes like Bass, Johnson and this nutcase are winning because of Guilty White Leftists + the vote of one or more identity group voting en masse. In the case of Bass & Johnson its AAs. In this case, it's the Muslim population.
Wiki says there are 1.5M Muslims in NYC and 1.2 Asians. The poll says "Asians" went for Mamdani 79-21%. Obviously many Muslims aren't Asian, but I'm sure the Muslim vote was large and 80% or more for Mamdani.
Whites went for Mamdani 61-39, and the college educated 62-38%. Obviously a lot of overlap there.
Blacks (62-38%), Hispanics (60-40), and the non-college educated (61-39) went strongly for Cuomo. The average 9th grade grad of any race has more common sense that a Columbia post-graduate.
