this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2025
950 points (99.2% liked)

Progressive Politics

2862 readers
1955 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Mamdani, a proudly socialist 33-year-old, holds a 44-36 percent lead over over former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo – who was hoping that New Yorkers had short memories, and were ready to re-elect the textbook centrist Democrat.

However, after the disaster of Trump’s first year back in the White House – with everyday American life interrupted by protests, immigration raids, corruption allegations and the unshakebale feeling that the nation is about to enter World War 3… It seems the pendulum is swinging back towards left-wing politics.

It appears that the success of Mamdani isn’t so much a vote against Trumpian politics, but more a vote against the stale nothingness of the Democrats top brass – who, while pitching themselves as the progressive option in America’s political system, very seldom action – or even – offer – left-wing policies.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] OmegaLemmy@discuss.online 3 points 40 minutes ago

I can only hope, and I hope mamdani inspired a new decade of socialist resurgence in elections, not just here but in LATAM, Africa, Europe and Asia

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 7 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

There’s also kind of an answer here to why people voted for Trump.

People are angry. They don’t necessarily know the best policies to resolve the country’s poor direction, but it’s clear to so many people that what we have isn’t working.

Many of us have had a conversation over drinks with a confident person at a party who maybe has a job you don’t understand well, and who just speaks confidently about all the things that are fucked up, and what they’d do in charge. As long as they don’t make claims of “Things are mostly okay”, they can make up any target: Immigrants, trans people, government overspending on overseas programs. The key is, they have to match the voter’s anger. The rest follows naturally.

I’d also say that’s how Obama got elected. He had a message of hope and change.

[–] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 8 minutes ago

I know people who voted for Trump specifically because they thought the best way to make things better in the long run was to elect someone who would make things drastically worse first. That it was necessary for him to win to teach a lesson to various dysfunctional parts of the system that would otherwise be complicit in a decline to the same destination, differing only in speed.

[–] VetOfTheSeas@discuss.online 5 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I have two points to add to this:

1 - As a liberal, there was nothing more frustrating than having to vote for Kamala, a candidate who was aggressively "pro-cop", especially as many in the country were protesting for defunding cops. Youre not going to energize most people with an angle like "You want us to vote to stop Trump?"

2 - As a person who is part of the black/immigrant community, the government has a history of ignoring us for decades. It's not the federal government, but the local government too. Systematic racism has always kept us down. And I hate to say it, Trump got a wall going. Trump has ICE harassing immigrants. These are newsworthy events, even if they're in the wrong fucking direction. But a Democrat has a history of never wanting to create a ripple as they appeal to all sides.

[–] Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee 5 points 1 hour ago

Come on, look at the alternative that the PARTY chose. Cuomo was meant to be handed that position.

The parties don't give a shit about what the public wants. They have an agenda and they're working towards it. Any time a candidate comes along and tries to really help people with policy changes they are stabbed in the front by the other party, and stabbed in the back by their own.

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 17 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think anyone is actually shocked. It's quite obvious that if you push policies that benefit large numbers of people, you might get support from large numbers of people. Of course that's not a guarantee, but it doesn't need to be.

But many Democrat politicians have been keen on appeasing their corporate backers by pretending otherwise, even though they knew it, we knew it, Bernie was saying it The cat has been out of the bag for a long time.

Bernie has corporate backers too. I think that might be just because he's old and doing what AOC is doing by not having backers is maybe a new progressive thing. I mean, she has a few small donors, but not like the older dems.

[–] ThatsTheSpirit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 hours ago

Liberals in shock at effective policy choice 🙄

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 15 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Frankly I don't know what folks should have otherwise expected. The "standard" candidate was a former governor who left the office in disgrace after misconduct.

Even if people were for whatever reason skeptical of a progressive candidate, the business as usual candidate was such a bad idea that people would rather go for it than vote for Cuomo.

Now we watch as Cuomo probably ruins everything by running in the general anyway. The same reason why people say the progressives that can't win Democrat primaries should bow out for general elections without RCV applies to "centrists" in the same boat. A progressive candidate won fair and square, stay out of his way.

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 36 minutes ago)

With Adams and Cuomo running as independents, I think they are going to split the vote of the people that weren't voting for Mamdami anyway, and is going to actually help him.

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 10 points 6 hours ago

Center right cumuo who is also a sex pest

[–] imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 6 hours ago

Paint me bemused

[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 81 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Posting this to offend the white supremacist mods in the politics forum

who they are

[–] VetOfTheSeas@discuss.online 2 points 1 hour ago

White supremacists mods in the politics forum?

On Lemmy?

Out of the loop here.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 0 points 4 hours ago

I'll add a tangentially connected piece of my own opinion - immigration is clearly beneficial, following a few simple rules:

  1. No labor migration, unless it's a wider agreement meaning citizens another country can freely cross the border. Otherwise a labor migrant can be threatened by deportation, thus becoming legally disadvantaged de-facto. The points further describe immigration, a one-way ticket.

  2. No legal disadvantage, an immigrant should be certain that if they get robbed\killed\bullied, there's a legal mechanism that will work to get some kind of justice (until they get citizenship).

  3. No filters other than quota, sufficient language knowledge and personal crime history. Filters can be easily abused. Except one - they must have a plan on how do they intend to make their living. Needed in most countries even for long-term visas, so not much to ask. A crowd of third-world country peasants trying to sneak somehow speaking worse English than me (not in text) is not going to pass that. Or if some will - it's for the better even. The rest can look for some other way.

  4. Advanced language, basic history (high school level), law (same), economics (same) and culture (the things that natives usually take for given, like not using your left hand for a handshake in an Arab country, or pop culture references, or the general perception of this and that idea, say, ex-Soviet immigrants in many countries, like some my relatives, seem to think they get to be conservative and racist to "brown" immigrants purely due to skin color and that they themselves are perceived as civilized people, well, LOL, why did you immigrate then) courses for immigrants, with exams mandatory to pass very well to get citizenship. However, their children get citizenship due to being born in the country (and receiving the mandatory education and going through other necessary procedures making them, well, not very different from anyone else in the country).

  5. No special support nets for immigrants. No tolerance to, say, crowds of illiterate Afghan people who've moved through a few countries, call them shit, but expect to get unemployment payments and social support and live like in heaven once they reach, say, Germany (in this example Germany will be called shit too once the person sees that there it's too expected that they find a job and work for themselves).

  6. Maybe programs to help new immigrants with finding a job are fine.

I generally think that citizenship of some countries being an unachievable dream for some who don't have it is a wrong situation. Horizontal mobility has been historically a source of good things. Just have to make sure the rule #3 is followed. And rule #4 - people in some countries live so differently from the west, that their perception of it is as of some magic land where white people give them candy and free stuff, some heaven they have to only get into. Rule #2 too - because we don't know which governments will put which rules into policy, affecting the composition of immigration. Some might prefer ex-Soviet idiots because they vote for people like Trump. Some might prefer Muslims because they vote for the more authoritarian kind of Democrats no questions asked. Some might prefer to let in a wave of poor Afghanis, because it'd be both a good scarecrow for something like sundown towns and a source of cheap labor, affecting labor rights of everyone else and the ability of protests to paralyze economy, for example.

OK, I'm talking about this from Russia, where the problem with Central Asian and other immigrants is that they are basically legally disadvantaged. It's very hard for them to get citizenship, but as a source of cheap labor they work very well. At the same time they won't do anything if the employer, say, takes half of their formal pay, or does something else illegal. Without Russian citizenship they in practice can't do it. All this while technically CIS and EAEU rules forbid all such stuff, but, eh, who can prevent Russia from doing what it can in its own toy integration projects.

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 31 points 11 hours ago

Any politician criticizing Mamdani receives money from AIPAC…

Wow what a coincidence,

Free Palestine from the apartheid genocidal colonizers, the fascist Israeli regime!

[–] carlossurf@lemmy.ca 38 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Shocker progressives are popular because checks notes … they fight for everyone not just the rich

[–] Wilco@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

You dirty socialist commie (those are the same thing, do your own research), how dare you support something other than tax breaks for billionaires. Those are job creators! People like Bezos deserve a second yacht for his yacht because the first yacht lacks a helicopter pad.

[–] IhaveCrabs111@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

That’s communism! /s

[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 52 points 13 hours ago (3 children)
[–] pachrist@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Amazing! A week ago they were all saying how awful NYC is. Now it's great. What an incredible transformation.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 19 points 6 hours ago

Republican: I can't tell a socialist from a communist but I can be racist at the same time.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

without looking at the name, it's impossible to tell which party he's from.

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Can you give me an example of a democrat saying something this Islamophobic anr calling for someone's deportation?

[–] arin@lemmy.world 36 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

They knew, that's why they threw Bernie Sanders under the bus over and over. The ones controlling the DNC do not want to lose their corporate backers if they allow true social equality.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›