Zohran Mamdani’s campaign represented a struggle for basic dignity and an affirmation of democratic potential. It was ceaselessly denounced by political and media elites from across the spectrum as something sinister, violent, and dangerous.
Zohran Mamdani’s campaign represented a struggle for basic dignity and an affirmation of democratic potential. It was ceaselessly denounced by political and media elites from across the spectrum as something sinister, violent, and dangerous.
Who is dying on a hill? I’m just pointing out that I know you don’t care about data when you find it inconvenient. Data like:
“They” this “they” that, is this also the faceless them who own the banks lol? The vast majority, everyone minus a rounding error, endorsed Mamdani and were excited by his victory in the DNC. We’re lucky to have him, like a second Bernie Sanders but not even Bernie runs on the DNC ticket outside of presidential primaries we invite him to participate in.
Who is talking about the banks? WTF are you on about?
I think you missed this part again:
It’s almost like you don’t like engaging with data that doesn’t fit your narrative. Weird, I wonder where I heard that before.
I’m a consequentialist, their reasons for supporting progress are meaningless in the face of progress.
No, your a partisan hack. You ignore data that makes your team look bad, and spin data to make them look good.
The system is partisan. Supporting a third party has a Partisan outcome. You’re effectively a partisan hack supporting the GOP by even comparing the two completely different parties. You’re normalizing destruction of rights fought long and hard to procure.
Both:
lol, sure thing buddy
DNC want to, based solely on their past legislation and voting history:
You live in a fantasy land.