14 ms·

I hope this win signals (to both parties) that voters are receptive and will get engaged when a clear message is presented about cost of living and quality of l

I hope this win signals (to both parties) that voters are receptive and will get engaged when a clear message is presented about cost of living and quality of life issues. Some of which are taken for granted in most other western countries. I’m no political wonk, and I’m curious what others with more insight might say about his ability to fund and implement his polices. I’m reminided of Obama and his hopeful message but he was mostly stymied on policy goals. Specifically Obamacare as an example ended up being watered down

NewJazz 11mo ago
Sometimes I think about what we could have had. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_Americans_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_Americans_Act
- js2 11mo ago
  And 15 years before that was Hillarycare (1993): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan_of_1993 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan_of_19... (Fuck you Bill Kristol.) There's a long, sad, littered history of attempts at universal care in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_health_care_reform_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_health_care_reform_...
  - edbaskerville 11mo ago
    Bill Kristol has come a long way! He would vote for Mamdani...over Cuomo and Sliwa anyway. https://www.cmcforum.com/post/bill-kristol-says-he-would-vote-for-zohran-mamdani-for-new-york-city-mayor https://www.cmcforum.com/post/bill-kristol-says-he-would-vot... You can hear him discussing it here: https://www.thebulwark.com/p/bill-kristol-fake-news-on-60-minutes https://www.thebulwark.com/p/bill-kristol-fake-news-on-60-mi... I'm also reminded of the time Jon Stewart got Bill Kristol to admit that a government-run health care system (the VA) was good: https://youtu.be/rRSZiWwiBuE https://youtu.be/rRSZiWwiBuE
    - dfe 11mo ago
      Bill Kristol is the same asshole he always was.
  - monocasa 11mo ago
    Interestingly, the ACA can trace its roots to the Republican counter proposal to Hillarycare written by the Heritage Foundation of recent Project 2025 fame. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Equity_and_Access_Reform_Today_Act_of_1993 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Equity_and_Access_Refor...
bdangubic 11mo ago
Obamacare being what it was is 1,000,000% Obama’s failure - he’ll tell you this same thing over coffee too. Just outmost disaster through and through how it was implemented. Zohran can easily fund which is why every single GOP Senator and Congresman went publicly against him. Can’t have people get any crazy ideas that they could actually have nice things. WTF does Congresman from a some shithole county in Alabama give a fuck about who Mayor of NYC is? but GOP is a well-oiled machine so it was all-hands-on-deck to prevent these ideas from infecting the nation… even though this seems like a victory, starting in about 10 minutes the entire GOP message for 2026 is going to be “Zohran is Democratic Party now” and it just might work
- cryzinger 11mo ago
  Zohran is the Democratic party now? Thank god, it's about time! :P
  - bdangubic 11mo ago
    works in NYC but in swing states “zohran is a commie” will hum along nicely enough…
    - tayo42 11mo ago
      Red and swing states all voted overwhelmingly towards democrats tn though
      - bdangubic 11mo ago
        in 2000? :)
    - johnnyanmac 11mo ago
      Why does Ohio care about who's mayor in New York City? Do people realize that a city mayor is one or two levels under a state govenor?
      - 11mo ago
codeddesign 11mo ago
[flagged]
- techblueberry 11mo ago
  The people who have healthcare and didn’t before think it’s better.
  - koolba 11mo ago
    For the small minority that get fully subsidized plans of course it’s great. Free stuff is always great for the receiver. But that’s only 5M people. For everybody else it just made healthcare more expensive. Nothing, absolutely nothing, in the ACA brought down costs. And hiding it behind ever increasing subsidies eventually comes to a breaking point.
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      > Nothing, absolutely nothing, in the ACA brought down costs Source for that claim?
      - koolba 11mo ago
        It’s basic economics, supply and demand. To lower prices you need to either increase supply or decrease demand. The reverse shifts the curves the other way and costs go up. The ACA did nothing to increase supply. There were no new doctors or clinics. And the subsidies and mandates to purchase insurance increase demand for medical care. So it causes prices to rise.
        blackqueeriroh 11mo ago
        So, no source!
      - terminalshort 11mo ago
        Given that the ACA forced insurance companies to sell insurance to people they previously found unprofitable to sell insurance to, basic economics suggests that the ACA probably raised the cost of insurance. That's not to say it makes it a bad thing. I would actually argue the opposite. Also the ACA requires insurance companies to make a max gross margin of 20%. This looks like a cost saving measure at first glance, but it's actually the opposite. Now insurance profits are actually increased by an increase in medical costs, and therefore the insurance companies are disincentivized to control costs.
burnt-resistor 11mo ago
[flagged]
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > who concealed that he was a warmongering, neoliberal hack Obama pitched himself as a pragmatist. He governed as a pragmatist. It honestly looks like Mamdani has the sense to do the same.
  - burnt-resistor 11mo ago
    Apples and oranges. Pragmatism without principles is still no principles. Mamdani has principles.
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      > Pragmatism without principles is still no principles. Mamdani has principles Ex ante versus ex post facto. New Yorkers aren’t idiots who vote in pie in the sky absolutist lunatics. I’m hopeful Mamdani can show new ideas are electable, even if his particular pitch is finely tuned to the deep blue.
  - skunix 11mo ago
    [flagged]
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      > one way to say Mamdani is also a plant, just like AOC imo He’s a candidate who won and can keep winning. I know a lot of dyed in wool democratic socialists. They’re nutjobs. Not only that, they’re clearly nutjobs from afar. Every politician in a single-party jurisdiction has to pivot between the primary and general. Mamdani and AOC did it well. The hypothetical non-“plant” you’re looking for is a Democrat analog to Kari Lake.
      - 11mo ago
treetalker 11mo ago
[flagged]
- johnnyanmac 11mo ago
  A warmongerer dying on Election Day (when elected officials haven't voted on War in 80 years) is an interesting sort of irony.
nialv7 11mo ago
I kinda feel Obama is more of a Trojan horse. It was not he tried and failed to get what he campaigned for implemented, it was more like he did a U turn after he got elected. e.g. he called for universal health care but once he was elected he started saying it was "too radical". I hope the same doesn't happen with Zohran. If he was going to fail after all, I wish that will at least be after he had fought as hard as he can.
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > he called for universal health care but once he was elected he started saying it was "too radical" ACA was the most radical package that could have passed, and it still cost Democrats the Congress. This line of argument reminds of the folks who complained about Sinema and Manchin. You know what we’d have with a few more Sinemas and Manchins in the party right now? A majority. The bill that passes is better than the ideal that doesn’t.
  - parineum 11mo ago
    > The bill that passes is better than the ideal that doesn’t. For your resume, sure. Sometimes reform only works when you fully commit and if half the country isn't on board, it's not better to pass some mutilated and watered down version.
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      > For your resume, sure No, for everyone. Some voters like politicians who pass zero legislation while holding firm to their values. Occasionally they get rewarded. Most often, they’re branded–correctly–ineffective. (And, I’d argue, unfit to lead. If you’re using millions of Americans as human shields to pass an ideologically-pure package, that’s immoral and belongs with Twitter celebrities, not leaders.)
      - parineum 11mo ago
        You didn't mention the effectiveness or positive effects of the hypothetically passed legislation at all. You're arguing that it's good for a politician's resume.
NedF 11mo ago
[dead]
762236 11mo ago
His policy proposals have been repeatedly disproven throughout recent history. Thank you for your attention in this matter.
- vvpan 11mo ago
  What has been dis-proven?
  - Aunche 11mo ago
    Rent freezes are such a bad idea that Mamdani himself implicitly admits as such by insisting they will be temporary with no justification as to why.
    - idle_zealot 11mo ago
      No? The policy is to freeze the rent in rent-controlled units for his entire term, which is as long as he can. The long-term solution is of course to build more units.
      - Ferret7446 11mo ago
        The freeze will have the same effect that rent control has always had, for the past decades in NY and elsewhere: make the situation worse. It being "temporary for his entire term" just means that the negative consequences will be "temporary for his entire term"; is that supposed to be a selling point? What was the definition of insanity again?
        whoooboyy 11mo ago
        Worse for who? Better for who? I guarantee you the people who live in the rent control apartments aren't thinking they are worse off from it.
        deburo 11mo ago
paxys 11mo ago
>50% of the TV ad spend in the Virginia governor election was on anti-trans ads, so no, don’t hold your breath.
reenorap 11mo ago
Obama was hated by San Franciscan progressives because he came in with all of these promises and then backtracked on almost all of them. He basically turned into a Bush-lite, and he even maintained every single one of Bush's policies as well as deadlines. For example, he talked a lot about abortion and then immediately said it wasn't a priority for him once he got into office. He never closed Guantanamo and in both elections said he didn't support gay marriage. ACA is a failure and the only thing it did was make it mandatory and unaffordable at the same time. Income inequality skyrocketed under him as well. Anyone who wasn't rich enough to afford some sort of asset like stocks or real estate was left behind and is now suffering.
- xivzgrev 11mo ago
  I'll give you one reason, among many, it wasn't a failure. It made it illegal to deny people health insurance coverage based on pre existing conditions. That was a big step forward in a broken system to restore some humanity to the system.
  - dbg31415 11mo ago
    True (*) They can't deny coverage for pre-existing conditions anymore, but insurers still have hundreds of other ways to avoid paying. There's no silver lining in the U.S. healthcare system -- it's built to exhaust, confuse, and bankrupt patients. And it's only gotten worse in recent years. (Will only get worse with the addition of more AI.) Joe Lieberman, a supposed Democrat, killed any real chance for reform we had in our generation. He then left Congress and quickly died -- his legacy is the broken healthcare system we have today, totally rigged against the very patients it's supposed to serve.
    - ZeroGravitas 11mo ago
      Joe Lieberman and basically every Republican ever, for decades. And the Republicans on the Supreme Court that hobbled what the Democrats managed to narrowly get through the political process. But sure, direct all the anger for that towards Democrats, that will result in better Healthcare any day now. I hear Trump has concepts of a plan that he's been working on for over a decade that he'll let us know about in just 2 weeks.
woodpanel 11mo ago
I have some confrontational views about this, but in good faith I’d like to invite some discussion with it (not an American). TLDR: You will see more Mamdanis in other cities. This is a treasure trove for MAGA. Expect at least 12 years of secure nationwide wins for whoever is championing that platform > I’m reminided of Obama and his hopeful message This is the gist of the PR campaign, voters fell for. It goes in line with him getting away with being “grassrootsy” when in fact he got tremendous funding from the typical NGOs (Open Society etc) and is a son of a Professor who was/is basically paid to tell American and African Top 5% why white people are bad. His win also shows the effect migration has on elections. Immigration inherently is a deal where incumbent residents define the terms, and when the other party returns the favor by electing anti-incumbents into office some incumbents will have profound buyer’s remorse. Fertile soil for the right. Mamdani’s success also puts a spotlight on foundational problems of the democrats. After all Mamdani is charismatic, yes, but more importantly he appealed on the issues. His policies will be abysmally failing to resolve the problems he criticized, yes - but that is unimportant to the voter. Important is that he believably criticized them. How is it, that these well-established circles of the democrats, these well oiled machines, where in states like CA or NY (or most US cities) mayorships, senatorships, congressional seats, and governorships are basically handed out by the DNC, fail to win on those issues? It’s not like making life affordable is not a core branding of the party. Well, it appears that the DNC gerrymandered itself to death. The dissolution of political contest from the public into internal primaries has stymied the platform’s vitality to a point where it can be easily hijacked by radicals. Expect many more Mamdani-esque wins locally. Which will mean many wore wins for MAGA nationally.
- johnnyanmac 11mo ago
  >How is it, that these well-established circles of the democrats, these well oiled machines, where in states like CA or NY (or most US cities) mayorships, senatorships, congressional seats, and governorships are basically handed out by the DNC, fail to win on those issues? You should know this better than the US, but our "democrats" are center right for the rest of the world. The goal is to sound progressive but then act in neoliberal ways to appeal to donors, after the attention isn't on them. I call these "Establshment Democrats", more concerned with keeping the status quo and being a PR machine to the people than actually making policy that benefit the people. That's why Mamdami can cut through by saying the things that Establshment Dems hated. And early on in his campaign when he gained momentum you can see the resistance against him by the Establishment, up to Cuomo decided to run independent after the primaries. I can't speak for the common person, but those actions speak a lot louder than any words Mamdami said. There is a rift in the US Left, but I think it's one Estblashiment Dems had coming for a while now. If absolutely nothing else, the rampant destruction of the country by the Trump admin has absolutely activated people in ways not seen since 9/11. And when people are active, words aren't enough anymore. They want action, to not see military roaming their streets and kidnapping US citizens. They want to see actual ways to fix the economy as these trade wars sap at their wealth. The collorary here is that the MAGA movement is also causing a rift in the US Right. There's definitely Esablishment Republicans that do not like this situation either. And there's the fact that all this is propped on one obsese, Dementia-ridden, 79 year old man. If/when he passes, there's going to be a huge power vacuum, and none of the headrunners are ready to fill that. If anything, the split on the Right will be worse than the split of the Left, when it eventually happens. At least the Left is having new blood to try and push that rift from the bottom up compared to the house of cards that is Trump and everyone who tried bundling under him.
metalman 11mo ago
"I’m curious what others with more insight might say about his ability to fund and implement his polices." Zohran has the largest, youngest, mandate in NYC in a very long time. The key is thats it's NYC and the place has an energy all it's own, and Zohran has that, and understands that NYC is always broke falling down, rich, and building up. Think about it, this guy just stood up, and Gotham said Hey!, you!, YES! NYC is pumped and ready to out work, out think, and out party, the entrenched, but tired and old, establishment. Lead, follow, or get out of the way(and cheer)
- AbstractH24 11mo ago
  I don't know about age breakdown, but in sheer percent of voters, Mamdani has essentially the same mandate Trump had a year ago. Make of that what you will.
  - nobody9999 11mo ago
    >I don't know about age breakdown, but in sheer percent of voters, Mamdani has essentially the same mandate Trump had a year ago. Huh? Trump v. Harris (2024) [0] Trump: 49.8%, Harris: 48.3% Margin: 1.5% Mamdani v. Cuomo vs. Sliwa (2025) [1] Mamdani: 50.4%, Cuomo: 41.6%, Sliwa: 7.1% Margins: Mamdani v. Cuomo: 9.8% Mamdan v. Sliwa: 40.7% how is that even remotely comparable? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidentia... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_New_York_City_mayoral_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_New_York_City_mayoral_ele... Edit: Fixed formatting.
    - AbstractH24 11mo ago
      It’s basic math: 50.4-49.8=0.6 That’s how. You seem to be conflating the margin between the winner and the next candidate with an overwhelming majority of people all feeling the same way. The former is a mandate, the latter is just being the least disliked. And remember, the day after the election last year people thought Trump had gotten a majority of the popular vote. But then, once absentee ballots were counted he fell just shy of it. This morning there was still 9% of the vote uncounted in NYC, so it’s not unlikely here also Mamdani will have a plurality rather than majority.
jjj123 11mo ago
Only speaking for myself (also not a political wonk): I do not expect Mamdani to be able to enact all of his policies. Not because of money but because of political opposition from the powerful. I felt the same about Bernie and Medicare for all. We have the money to do it, but the powerful will not let it happen. However: that doesn’t mean we should elect politicians that won’t even try to make these things happen. It’s important to have a North Star to shoot for, to move the Overton window of what’s worth discussing and to keep an eye on what political machinations block it from happening. I will never vote for a politician who pre-compromises with an imagined opposition, because that tells me they have a different North Star than I do in the first place.
- Lord-Jobo 11mo ago
  Absolutely, elect enough Mamdani’s and the powerful will not be able to stop the changes. It’s the expectation that a single Mamdani or Sanders can fix much that has lead to extreme apathy from much of the electorate.
  - hagbard_c 11mo ago
    There are plenty of examples in the world to turn to to learn what happens when you get a critical Mamdani-Sanders mass. They tend to be rather unpleasant examples which are usually done away with using a variety on the "true socialism has never been tried" claim. No, Mamdani will not be able to turn New York into Caracas just yet. Let's all hope that nobody will be able to accomplish this.
    - analognoise 11mo ago
      There's no reason we should pay 2x what everyone else does, and live 10 years less (for healthcare). We could accept a good deal of socialism into our system and see only benefits; there are a number of things which should not be profit-motive driven at all.
      - imperfect_blue 11mo ago
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
_DeadFred_ 11mo ago
People should also remember Democrats won contested Governor ships as well. This wasn't just a Mamdani election/victory night, though the far left want to make it look that way.
sharts 11mo ago
Pretty sure both parties already know this. They both just don't want that to be a topic of conversation to control the window of what can / cannot be discussed in terms of what benefits the parties. These people are not dumb. They are just very very interested in self-dealing.
vga42 11mo ago
Demagoguery is at least a 2000 years old concept.

NewJazz 11mo ago

Sometimes I think about what we could have had. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_Americans_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_Americans_Act

js2 11mo ago
And 15 years before that was Hillarycare (1993): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan_of_1993 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan_of_19... (Fuck you Bill Kristol.) There's a long, sad, littered history of attempts at universal care in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_health_care_reform_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_health_care_reform_...
- edbaskerville 11mo ago
  Bill Kristol has come a long way! He would vote for Mamdani...over Cuomo and Sliwa anyway. https://www.cmcforum.com/post/bill-kristol-says-he-would-vote-for-zohran-mamdani-for-new-york-city-mayor https://www.cmcforum.com/post/bill-kristol-says-he-would-vot... You can hear him discussing it here: https://www.thebulwark.com/p/bill-kristol-fake-news-on-60-minutes https://www.thebulwark.com/p/bill-kristol-fake-news-on-60-mi... I'm also reminded of the time Jon Stewart got Bill Kristol to admit that a government-run health care system (the VA) was good: https://youtu.be/rRSZiWwiBuE https://youtu.be/rRSZiWwiBuE
  - dfe 11mo ago
    Bill Kristol is the same asshole he always was.
- monocasa 11mo ago
  Interestingly, the ACA can trace its roots to the Republican counter proposal to Hillarycare written by the Heritage Foundation of recent Project 2025 fame. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Equity_and_Access_Reform_Today_Act_of_1993 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Equity_and_Access_Refor...

bdangubic 11mo ago

Obamacare being what it was is 1,000,000% Obama’s failure - he’ll tell you this same thing over coffee too. Just outmost disaster through and through how it was implemented. Zohran can easily fund which is why every single GOP Senator and Congresman went publicly against him. Can’t have people get any crazy ideas that they could actually have nice things. WTF does Congresman from a some shithole county in Alabama give a fuck about who Mayor of NYC is? but GOP is a well-oiled machine so it was all-hands-on-deck to prevent these ideas from infecting the nation… even though this seems like a victory, starting in about 10 minutes the entire GOP message for 2026 is going to be “Zohran is Democratic Party now” and it just might work

cryzinger 11mo ago
Zohran is the Democratic party now? Thank god, it's about time! :P
- bdangubic 11mo ago
  works in NYC but in swing states “zohran is a commie” will hum along nicely enough…
  - tayo42 11mo ago
    Red and swing states all voted overwhelmingly towards democrats tn though
    - bdangubic 11mo ago
      in 2000? :)
  - johnnyanmac 11mo ago
    Why does Ohio care about who's mayor in New York City? Do people realize that a city mayor is one or two levels under a state govenor?
    - 11mo ago

codeddesign 11mo ago

[flagged]

techblueberry 11mo ago
The people who have healthcare and didn’t before think it’s better.
- koolba 11mo ago
  For the small minority that get fully subsidized plans of course it’s great. Free stuff is always great for the receiver. But that’s only 5M people. For everybody else it just made healthcare more expensive. Nothing, absolutely nothing, in the ACA brought down costs. And hiding it behind ever increasing subsidies eventually comes to a breaking point.
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    > Nothing, absolutely nothing, in the ACA brought down costs Source for that claim?
    - koolba 11mo ago
      It’s basic economics, supply and demand. To lower prices you need to either increase supply or decrease demand. The reverse shifts the curves the other way and costs go up. The ACA did nothing to increase supply. There were no new doctors or clinics. And the subsidies and mandates to purchase insurance increase demand for medical care. So it causes prices to rise.
      - blackqueeriroh 11mo ago
        So, no source!
    - terminalshort 11mo ago
      Given that the ACA forced insurance companies to sell insurance to people they previously found unprofitable to sell insurance to, basic economics suggests that the ACA probably raised the cost of insurance. That's not to say it makes it a bad thing. I would actually argue the opposite. Also the ACA requires insurance companies to make a max gross margin of 20%. This looks like a cost saving measure at first glance, but it's actually the opposite. Now insurance profits are actually increased by an increase in medical costs, and therefore the insurance companies are disincentivized to control costs.

burnt-resistor 11mo ago

[flagged]

JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
> who concealed that he was a warmongering, neoliberal hack Obama pitched himself as a pragmatist. He governed as a pragmatist. It honestly looks like Mamdani has the sense to do the same.
- burnt-resistor 11mo ago
  Apples and oranges. Pragmatism without principles is still no principles. Mamdani has principles.
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    > Pragmatism without principles is still no principles. Mamdani has principles Ex ante versus ex post facto. New Yorkers aren’t idiots who vote in pie in the sky absolutist lunatics. I’m hopeful Mamdani can show new ideas are electable, even if his particular pitch is finely tuned to the deep blue.
- skunix 11mo ago
  [flagged]
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    > one way to say Mamdani is also a plant, just like AOC imo He’s a candidate who won and can keep winning. I know a lot of dyed in wool democratic socialists. They’re nutjobs. Not only that, they’re clearly nutjobs from afar. Every politician in a single-party jurisdiction has to pivot between the primary and general. Mamdani and AOC did it well. The hypothetical non-“plant” you’re looking for is a Democrat analog to Kari Lake.
    - 11mo ago

treetalker 11mo ago

[flagged]

johnnyanmac 11mo ago
A warmongerer dying on Election Day (when elected officials haven't voted on War in 80 years) is an interesting sort of irony.

nialv7 11mo ago

I kinda feel Obama is more of a Trojan horse. It was not he tried and failed to get what he campaigned for implemented, it was more like he did a U turn after he got elected. e.g. he called for universal health care but once he was elected he started saying it was "too radical". I hope the same doesn't happen with Zohran. If he was going to fail after all, I wish that will at least be after he had fought as hard as he can.

JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
> he called for universal health care but once he was elected he started saying it was "too radical" ACA was the most radical package that could have passed, and it still cost Democrats the Congress. This line of argument reminds of the folks who complained about Sinema and Manchin. You know what we’d have with a few more Sinemas and Manchins in the party right now? A majority. The bill that passes is better than the ideal that doesn’t.
- parineum 11mo ago
  > The bill that passes is better than the ideal that doesn’t. For your resume, sure. Sometimes reform only works when you fully commit and if half the country isn't on board, it's not better to pass some mutilated and watered down version.
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    > For your resume, sure No, for everyone. Some voters like politicians who pass zero legislation while holding firm to their values. Occasionally they get rewarded. Most often, they’re branded–correctly–ineffective. (And, I’d argue, unfit to lead. If you’re using millions of Americans as human shields to pass an ideologically-pure package, that’s immoral and belongs with Twitter celebrities, not leaders.)
    - parineum 11mo ago
      You didn't mention the effectiveness or positive effects of the hypothetically passed legislation at all. You're arguing that it's good for a politician's resume.

NedF 11mo ago

[dead]

762236 11mo ago

His policy proposals have been repeatedly disproven throughout recent history. Thank you for your attention in this matter.

vvpan 11mo ago
What has been dis-proven?
- Aunche 11mo ago
  Rent freezes are such a bad idea that Mamdani himself implicitly admits as such by insisting they will be temporary with no justification as to why.
  - idle_zealot 11mo ago
    No? The policy is to freeze the rent in rent-controlled units for his entire term, which is as long as he can. The long-term solution is of course to build more units.
    - Ferret7446 11mo ago
      The freeze will have the same effect that rent control has always had, for the past decades in NY and elsewhere: make the situation worse. It being "temporary for his entire term" just means that the negative consequences will be "temporary for his entire term"; is that supposed to be a selling point? What was the definition of insanity again?
      - whoooboyy 11mo ago
        Worse for who? Better for who? I guarantee you the people who live in the rent control apartments aren't thinking they are worse off from it.
        deburo 11mo ago

paxys 11mo ago

>50% of the TV ad spend in the Virginia governor election was on anti-trans ads, so no, don’t hold your breath.

reenorap 11mo ago

Obama was hated by San Franciscan progressives because he came in with all of these promises and then backtracked on almost all of them. He basically turned into a Bush-lite, and he even maintained every single one of Bush's policies as well as deadlines. For example, he talked a lot about abortion and then immediately said it wasn't a priority for him once he got into office. He never closed Guantanamo and in both elections said he didn't support gay marriage. ACA is a failure and the only thing it did was make it mandatory and unaffordable at the same time. Income inequality skyrocketed under him as well. Anyone who wasn't rich enough to afford some sort of asset like stocks or real estate was left behind and is now suffering.

xivzgrev 11mo ago
I'll give you one reason, among many, it wasn't a failure. It made it illegal to deny people health insurance coverage based on pre existing conditions. That was a big step forward in a broken system to restore some humanity to the system.
- dbg31415 11mo ago
  True (*) They can't deny coverage for pre-existing conditions anymore, but insurers still have hundreds of other ways to avoid paying. There's no silver lining in the U.S. healthcare system -- it's built to exhaust, confuse, and bankrupt patients. And it's only gotten worse in recent years. (Will only get worse with the addition of more AI.) Joe Lieberman, a supposed Democrat, killed any real chance for reform we had in our generation. He then left Congress and quickly died -- his legacy is the broken healthcare system we have today, totally rigged against the very patients it's supposed to serve.
  - ZeroGravitas 11mo ago
    Joe Lieberman and basically every Republican ever, for decades. And the Republicans on the Supreme Court that hobbled what the Democrats managed to narrowly get through the political process. But sure, direct all the anger for that towards Democrats, that will result in better Healthcare any day now. I hear Trump has concepts of a plan that he's been working on for over a decade that he'll let us know about in just 2 weeks.

woodpanel 11mo ago

I have some confrontational views about this, but in good faith I’d like to invite some discussion with it (not an American). TLDR: You will see more Mamdanis in other cities. This is a treasure trove for MAGA. Expect at least 12 years of secure nationwide wins for whoever is championing that platform > I’m reminided of Obama and his hopeful message This is the gist of the PR campaign, voters fell for. It goes in line with him getting away with being “grassrootsy” when in fact he got tremendous funding from the typical NGOs (Open Society etc) and is a son of a Professor who was/is basically paid to tell American and African Top 5% why white people are bad. His win also shows the effect migration has on elections. Immigration inherently is a deal where incumbent residents define the terms, and when the other party returns the favor by electing anti-incumbents into office some incumbents will have profound buyer’s remorse. Fertile soil for the right. Mamdani’s success also puts a spotlight on foundational problems of the democrats. After all Mamdani is charismatic, yes, but more importantly he appealed on the issues. His policies will be abysmally failing to resolve the problems he criticized, yes - but that is unimportant to the voter. Important is that he believably criticized them. How is it, that these well-established circles of the democrats, these well oiled machines, where in states like CA or NY (or most US cities) mayorships, senatorships, congressional seats, and governorships are basically handed out by the DNC, fail to win on those issues? It’s not like making life affordable is not a core branding of the party. Well, it appears that the DNC gerrymandered itself to death. The dissolution of political contest from the public into internal primaries has stymied the platform’s vitality to a point where it can be easily hijacked by radicals. Expect many more Mamdani-esque wins locally. Which will mean many wore wins for MAGA nationally.

johnnyanmac 11mo ago
>How is it, that these well-established circles of the democrats, these well oiled machines, where in states like CA or NY (or most US cities) mayorships, senatorships, congressional seats, and governorships are basically handed out by the DNC, fail to win on those issues? You should know this better than the US, but our "democrats" are center right for the rest of the world. The goal is to sound progressive but then act in neoliberal ways to appeal to donors, after the attention isn't on them. I call these "Establshment Democrats", more concerned with keeping the status quo and being a PR machine to the people than actually making policy that benefit the people. That's why Mamdami can cut through by saying the things that Establshment Dems hated. And early on in his campaign when he gained momentum you can see the resistance against him by the Establishment, up to Cuomo decided to run independent after the primaries. I can't speak for the common person, but those actions speak a lot louder than any words Mamdami said. There is a rift in the US Left, but I think it's one Estblashiment Dems had coming for a while now. If absolutely nothing else, the rampant destruction of the country by the Trump admin has absolutely activated people in ways not seen since 9/11. And when people are active, words aren't enough anymore. They want action, to not see military roaming their streets and kidnapping US citizens. They want to see actual ways to fix the economy as these trade wars sap at their wealth. The collorary here is that the MAGA movement is also causing a rift in the US Right. There's definitely Esablishment Republicans that do not like this situation either. And there's the fact that all this is propped on one obsese, Dementia-ridden, 79 year old man. If/when he passes, there's going to be a huge power vacuum, and none of the headrunners are ready to fill that. If anything, the split on the Right will be worse than the split of the Left, when it eventually happens. At least the Left is having new blood to try and push that rift from the bottom up compared to the house of cards that is Trump and everyone who tried bundling under him.

metalman 11mo ago

"I’m curious what others with more insight might say about his ability to fund and implement his polices." Zohran has the largest, youngest, mandate in NYC in a very long time. The key is thats it's NYC and the place has an energy all it's own, and Zohran has that, and understands that NYC is always broke falling down, rich, and building up. Think about it, this guy just stood up, and Gotham said Hey!, you!, YES! NYC is pumped and ready to out work, out think, and out party, the entrenched, but tired and old, establishment. Lead, follow, or get out of the way(and cheer)

AbstractH24 11mo ago
I don't know about age breakdown, but in sheer percent of voters, Mamdani has essentially the same mandate Trump had a year ago. Make of that what you will.
- nobody9999 11mo ago
  >I don't know about age breakdown, but in sheer percent of voters, Mamdani has essentially the same mandate Trump had a year ago. Huh? Trump v. Harris (2024) [0] Trump: 49.8%, Harris: 48.3% Margin: 1.5% Mamdani v. Cuomo vs. Sliwa (2025) [1] Mamdani: 50.4%, Cuomo: 41.6%, Sliwa: 7.1% Margins: Mamdani v. Cuomo: 9.8% Mamdan v. Sliwa: 40.7% how is that even remotely comparable? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidentia... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_New_York_City_mayoral_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_New_York_City_mayoral_ele... Edit: Fixed formatting.
  - AbstractH24 11mo ago
    It’s basic math: 50.4-49.8=0.6 That’s how. You seem to be conflating the margin between the winner and the next candidate with an overwhelming majority of people all feeling the same way. The former is a mandate, the latter is just being the least disliked. And remember, the day after the election last year people thought Trump had gotten a majority of the popular vote. But then, once absentee ballots were counted he fell just shy of it. This morning there was still 9% of the vote uncounted in NYC, so it’s not unlikely here also Mamdani will have a plurality rather than majority.

jjj123 11mo ago

Only speaking for myself (also not a political wonk): I do not expect Mamdani to be able to enact all of his policies. Not because of money but because of political opposition from the powerful. I felt the same about Bernie and Medicare for all. We have the money to do it, but the powerful will not let it happen. However: that doesn’t mean we should elect politicians that won’t even try to make these things happen. It’s important to have a North Star to shoot for, to move the Overton window of what’s worth discussing and to keep an eye on what political machinations block it from happening. I will never vote for a politician who pre-compromises with an imagined opposition, because that tells me they have a different North Star than I do in the first place.

Lord-Jobo 11mo ago
Absolutely, elect enough Mamdani’s and the powerful will not be able to stop the changes. It’s the expectation that a single Mamdani or Sanders can fix much that has lead to extreme apathy from much of the electorate.
- hagbard_c 11mo ago
  There are plenty of examples in the world to turn to to learn what happens when you get a critical Mamdani-Sanders mass. They tend to be rather unpleasant examples which are usually done away with using a variety on the "true socialism has never been tried" claim. No, Mamdani will not be able to turn New York into Caracas just yet. Let's all hope that nobody will be able to accomplish this.
  - analognoise 11mo ago
    There's no reason we should pay 2x what everyone else does, and live 10 years less (for healthcare). We could accept a good deal of socialism into our system and see only benefits; there are a number of things which should not be profit-motive driven at all.
    - imperfect_blue 11mo ago

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

_DeadFred_ 11mo ago

People should also remember Democrats won contested Governor ships as well. This wasn't just a Mamdani election/victory night, though the far left want to make it look that way.

sharts 11mo ago

Pretty sure both parties already know this. They both just don't want that to be a topic of conversation to control the window of what can / cannot be discussed in terms of what benefits the parties. These people are not dumb. They are just very very interested in self-dealing.

vga42 11mo ago

Demagoguery is at least a 2000 years old concept.