He is himself a democrat and part of his recent turn came from recruiting DNC ghouls to his campaign. The dems are perfectly aware that they can usually capture radicals and won’t hesitate to when it’s obviously their best option.
democrats are not united behind that and many are still putting him/his policies on blast. “capture” is definitely something that can happen, but right now you’re jumping the gun without any policy evidence for that.
AOC being a shitthead is evidenced by her record, Mamdani does not yet have a record.
Your argument doesn’t make sense, because it logically implies that we can’t be critical of the ideology and approach of someone who has not yet been elected, as though nothing counts until they vote or take an executive action, as though what they are going to do has no connection with what we can observe during the campaign. What we can observe during this most recent turn of his campaign is bringing DNC ghouls onto his campaign and reversing his stance on an issue where he professed something close enough to the correct position and has now accepted the fundamentally Zionist and Islamophobic premises of his rightist critics.
Name for me a single politician who has acted in office further left than they advertised themselves as. If you can find some mayor of a mid-sized town in Maine for whom that is true, compare that data point to the near-universal trend of Democrats speaking like they are at least 10 degrees to the left of everything they actually do in office, and sometimes much further.
it’s not “nothing counts until they vote”, if Mamdani started backpedalling on everything before the general that would add up. the current question is a point of rhetoric, not even a solid policy, people need to be realistic in assessing that
Where’s the line, in his current situation? What if he just backpedals on one policy? “It’s just one concession, and he had to in order to win. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good?” What about all that he conceivably could do but avoids, e.g. New York City is the finance capitol of the world and he seems to think they don’t present that much of a specific problem.
you put e.g. in front of -thinking- finance capital is a problem, this is a nonsense parameter.
if there are concrete actions a mayor could take against finance capital Mamdani has failed to promise/rolled back, bring those up. I’ll give you one: rent freeze. If Mamdani voluntarily gives up rent action (as opposed to endless state/federal intervention and court cases as will likely be the case) I’ll be first in line to torch the dude’s campaign
you put e.g. in front of -thinking- finance capital is a problem, this is a nonsense parameter.
I’m sorry, are we contesting if finance capital is one of the biggest problems in the world?
if there are concrete actions a mayor could take against finance capital Mamdani has failed to promise/rolled back, bring those up. I’ll give you one: rent freeze. If Mamdani voluntarily gives up rent action (as opposed to endless state/federal intervention and court cases as will likely be the case) I’ll be first in line to torch the dude’s campaign
Obviously there are ties between real estate and finance capital, but the one is not the other. I know that he’s proposed actions against landlords, grocers, and functionally also gig transit, which are good, but also demonstrate that he has the awareness of a need to address specific sectors and not rely on genericized solutions like UBI, which in turn makes it strange to me that he hasn’t really put forward anything regarding finance capital since, again, NYC is the world capitol of it and it’s one of the more malignant things on the planet.
My gripe at the moment isn’t that he hasn’t put forward whatever my pet solution is, but that he literally doesn’t have any specific policy here afaik. A public bank could be neat, and also New York City is just a hive of both white collar crime and white collar activity that is at best sort of in a gray zone but should be considered criminal: https://www.nycbar.org/in-the-news/fee-sharing-unethical-says-new-york-city-bar-cdr-news/
He is himself a democrat and part of his recent turn came from recruiting DNC ghouls to his campaign. The dems are perfectly aware that they can usually capture radicals and won’t hesitate to when it’s obviously their best option.
democrats are not united behind that and many are still putting him/his policies on blast. “capture” is definitely something that can happen, but right now you’re jumping the gun without any policy evidence for that.
AOC being a shitthead is evidenced by her record, Mamdani does not yet have a record.
Your argument doesn’t make sense, because it logically implies that we can’t be critical of the ideology and approach of someone who has not yet been elected, as though nothing counts until they vote or take an executive action, as though what they are going to do has no connection with what we can observe during the campaign. What we can observe during this most recent turn of his campaign is bringing DNC ghouls onto his campaign and reversing his stance on an issue where he professed something close enough to the correct position and has now accepted the fundamentally Zionist and Islamophobic premises of his rightist critics.
Name for me a single politician who has acted in office further left than they advertised themselves as. If you can find some mayor of a mid-sized town in Maine for whom that is true, compare that data point to the near-universal trend of Democrats speaking like they are at least 10 degrees to the left of everything they actually do in office, and sometimes much further.
it’s not “nothing counts until they vote”, if Mamdani started backpedalling on everything before the general that would add up. the current question is a point of rhetoric, not even a solid policy, people need to be realistic in assessing that
Where’s the line, in his current situation? What if he just backpedals on one policy? “It’s just one concession, and he had to in order to win. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good?” What about all that he conceivably could do but avoids, e.g. New York City is the finance capitol of the world and he seems to think they don’t present that much of a specific problem.
what do you think these things are
I just gave an example?
you put e.g. in front of -thinking- finance capital is a problem, this is a nonsense parameter.
if there are concrete actions a mayor could take against finance capital Mamdani has failed to promise/rolled back, bring those up. I’ll give you one: rent freeze. If Mamdani voluntarily gives up rent action (as opposed to endless state/federal intervention and court cases as will likely be the case) I’ll be first in line to torch the dude’s campaign
I’m sorry, are we contesting if finance capital is one of the biggest problems in the world?
Obviously there are ties between real estate and finance capital, but the one is not the other. I know that he’s proposed actions against landlords, grocers, and functionally also gig transit, which are good, but also demonstrate that he has the awareness of a need to address specific sectors and not rely on genericized solutions like UBI, which in turn makes it strange to me that he hasn’t really put forward anything regarding finance capital since, again, NYC is the world capitol of it and it’s one of the more malignant things on the planet.
My gripe at the moment isn’t that he hasn’t put forward whatever my pet solution is, but that he literally doesn’t have any specific policy here afaik. A public bank could be neat, and also New York City is just a hive of both white collar crime and white collar activity that is at best sort of in a gray zone but should be considered criminal: https://www.nycbar.org/in-the-news/fee-sharing-unethical-says-new-york-city-bar-cdr-news/