politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
You're completely missing the point. Just because you win the primary doesn't mean the party will actually support you. He's still receiving opposition from suburban Democrats, and the party leadership isn't endorsing him, as would be expected for any other victor of the mayoral primary.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/25/nyregion/mamdani-democrats-schumer-jeffries.html
He'll still have the D spot on the ballot, but a lot of the value of the party is having the people of the party behind you. The endorsements, leaders campaigning with you, sharing resources with you, etc. You can win a primary and still be completely shut out by the Democratic establishment.
This shows the utter sham that "Vote Blue No Matter Who" is. It only applies when it's a centrist that wins a nomination. When a centrist wins a primary, it becomes the responsibility of every progressive to hold their nose and vote for the corporate pig. When a progressive wins the party, the centrists circle the wagons, refuse to support the progressive, and often support the Republican. Loyalty to the party only goes one way with liberals.
They aren’t required to fund him, that’s true, but all campaign donations from the DNC are transparent. He can compare it to Adams’ purse in 2021. They also can’t stop him from fundraising directly.
If he makes it clear that they are withholding financial support given to prior candidates, then people will donate to him directly and the DNC will be publicly called out for favoring past candidates. That’s the last thing they need after the Debbie Wasserman-Shultz/Hillary Clinton scandal.
It's not just about the funding. You also have key figures in the party actively fearmongering against him. A NY senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, did an interview the other day, playing him up as some sort of rabid antisemite and refusing to endorse him. Same with party leadership. If Cuomo or Adams had won, they would have had their endorsements announced and posted everywhere within minutes of the primaries being called, but when a progressive who uses the big, scary s-word wins, they sit on their hands and offer lukewarm statements about how they'll work with him if he wins the election, but they have reservations and don't want to commit to endorsing him. When you have Democrat public officials and high ranking figures in the party refusing to endorse "their" candidate, that can do a lot of damage to their chances amongst those who aren't very politically engaged, or who lack media literacy.
Out of Hochul, Gillibrand, Schumer and Pelosi, I'm not aware of a single one who has actually endorsed him in the race. What happened to the calls for party unity and voting blue no matter who in order to defeat fascism they loved to trot out so much when they recently fielded unpopular, establishment candidates? I guess a little fascism is okay, as long as it's just one city, now?
These sorts of Dems would rather see Sliwa win and start goose-stepping through the streets of NYC with his brownshirt losers than see Zohran win. They know that Zohran winning and having a successful term would be a damning indictment of their own failure to lead and step up to the moment, and the gears are spinning once again for them to do their best to make sure they don't have to deal with that.
Edit: misattributed the interview to Hochul, but the point remains with it being Democratic Senator from NY, rather than the governor.
Oh you mean like the Bernie scandal?
Yeah buddy you haven't paid enough attention to how the DNC functions. They'll lie, just like the GOP.
You don’t even know what you’re talking about. The Bernie scandal was over the primary. That’s what Zohran just won. He’s now on the Democratic ticket. He has full transparency with their donor records.
My Brother in Christ, you don't get it. Bernie won the primary in my state. That didn't stop the moderates and blue dogs from torpedoing his campaign with rat fuckery and minimal party support. What guarantees Zohran's campaign is going to be any different?
While still running in the primary, the DNC is not technically supposed to provide funding directly to a candidate. That was part of the scandal with Hillary. Bernie was unable to challenge the unbalanced support because he didn’t receive any, and had no access to Hillary’s collusion with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
The difference is Zohran has now won the primary, and is the Democratic candidate for NYC mayor. He will now be financed by the DNC. He can compare the amount that he is provided by the DNC to the very accessible public records of past Democratic mayoral candidates. Do you understand the difference now?
Yeah, I get it: you're naive. You believe being officially on the ballot is somehow going to protect him from the same ratfucking bullshit thats done in other progressive and leftist candidates.
Those candidates get fucked out of winning the primary and getting on the ticket. Zohran passed that hurdle with a grassroots campaign, meaning it’s never been about the establishment. It’s always been about us participating in the primaries. If every progressive voted in every Democratic primary, no amount of underfunding or slander would stop us. It’s just that simple.