this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2025
453 points (99.6% liked)

Progressive Politics

2859 readers
1621 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
[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 7 points 1 hour ago

My expectation is that this will motivate them to pull another Ross Perot. They will spend all of their time working with Republicans between this election and the next dreaming up institutional hurdles to a socialist making headway in a political campaign, just like they made it institutionally impossible for third parties to sniff a presidency.

If Mamdani actually does try to do the things he says he will (which I doubt) those efforts to institutionally hamper non-conservative candidacies will be doubled.

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 11 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Don't worry guys. I'm sure the democrats will learn this this time around...

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I think the only option is to not vote for them if they don't.

[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 hour ago

sure seems like thats what they want by now

[–] OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world 73 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Dems continue to be baffled by the popularity of progressive politicians. They can’t fathom Americans wanting less & less to do with their moderate-right-wing bullshit, while the far-right moves farther & farther right.

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 23 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

It's the foreign influence within the DNC brought in after private money flooded US politics. Get rid of Citizens United and the system will do a lot to correct itself.

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 16 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Lol, no it really isn't. Citizens vs United was the culmination of decades of the DNC constantly bending over backwards to compromise with conservatives.

Basically in the late 80's and early 90's the legislative grid lock we all know and love today was becoming the status quo. So a strategy of compromising with "moderate" conservatives over policy that benefited aspects of both parties was popularized by the Clinton's.

This "Thirdway politics" led to short term benefits, and allowed the Clintons to get a death grip over the DNC. After a short period conservatives took advantage of this tactic of compromise to drag the DNC further and further to the right. Basically every sitting senator and most of the politicians in the house made their political careers by being the best at compromising with the right.

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 hours ago

I was under the impression moderate compromise was code for working to satisfy donor demands. Which wouldn’t be so pressing with meaningful campaign finance reform.

[–] Bigfish@lemmynsfw.com 9 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

While you're not wrong, I don't know how we can possibly put that genie back in the bottle.

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 hours ago
  1. Stack the court then sue Elon or any PAC.

  2. Cling to power for 40ish years and realign the court as the conservatives die.

  3. Impeachment and removal of corrupt justices, then sue.

1 and 3 are the only remotely realistic but I'm not that optimistic right now.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 2 points 4 hours ago

Not moderate, not center, firmly not-openly-sociopathic-yet right.

[–] makyo@lemmy.world 24 points 5 hours ago
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 94 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Jesus fucking christ, where my crew at?

This is our moment to fucking run it in the faces of the idiots telling us we needed to have candidates with barely left of center politics in this country.

People who have told you you need to accept less from candidates because abwd are the toxic bane that handed us Trump. You can't win elections on being a diet piece of shit; you actually have to stand for some thing.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Genocide Joe has got to g..

Wait what are we doing again

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 6 points 4 hours ago

We're taking a victory lap.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 12 points 6 hours ago (3 children)
[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Blue MAGA is such a stupid fucking term. Anyone who uses it should likely be disregarded.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 24 points 6 hours ago (8 children)

ABWD refers to "Any Blue Will Do", which is a slogan, ideology, and voting strategy associated with what is now collectively known as "Blue MAGA".

The charitable version of their argument is that we need to just support every D, no matter what. The problem that ABWD creates is two fold. The first problem, is that in effect, the policy works against its self as electoral strategy. It second problem is that it also works against itself as governing strategy. I'm going to refer to these as "anti-strategies" because I think its important to point out that they are thought about and employed as if they are in-fact strategies that could win an election. They make you feel like a smart person, and are regularly used as a cudgel against other approaches, but they are self-defeating: an anti-strategy hurts you, not helps you.

This clip of Whoopi Goldberg saying she would vote for Joe Biden even if he was pooping his pants on stage highlights:

So the issue that ABWD creates in this context is that, even though Whoopi here is clear that she would vote for a candidate so aged that they shit themselves on stage, American voters wont. And this problem is rampant across Democratic primaries. We're constantly getting candidates forced into elections through AIPAC, the DCCC, directly from the DNC, who aren't electable within the Democratic base, for whatever reason. Here, Whoopi has effectively lowered the bar to the floor. And the problem is, that while a pants-shitter might be fine for Whoopi, its not fine for literally everyone else. By insisting on this anti-strategy, that we had to support Biden as the candidate when it was clear he was completely incapable of governing, let alone winning the election (even when Trump was as unpopular as he was), this insistence was basically an instance we lose the election. Its an important historical footnote that Blue MAGA/ ABWD did win the ideological fight that summer. And we lost the 2024 election as a result.

So the second issue with ABWD/ Blue MAGA is that we end up with Blue Dogs, or Democrats that are basically worthless for progressing any Democratic legislative or governance priorities. Effectively, ABWD is used to put conservative, basically Republican Democrats into safe blue districts, which they might hold for decades. A classic example of this was AOC versus Crowley, where Crowley held the house seat responsible for Queens, NY, one of the most progressive house district populations there is. And he REGULARLY defeated, shut down any kind of progressive legislation. There are many, many others, for example, Ed Case, House District 1, Honolulu HI, who voted to censure Al Greene. ABWD/ Blue MAGA results in bad Democrats getting into office and holding space which would otherwise be occupied by more reliable, more progressive Democrats. When you go to actually get get anything done, ABWD defeats your ability to govern.

[–] drhodl@lemmy.world 1 points 3 minutes ago

Do you really think that Biden's "non governing" was worse than Drumphs autocratic "governing"? I think that if the stakes were less, then your approach may have merit. But right now, we're talking Drumph, and literally anything is better than what he offers.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] CuddlyCassowary@lemmy.world 7 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Anyone blue will do…maybe?

[–] don@lemm.ee 4 points 6 hours ago
[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

It's almost as though people want good policies. Bah, the people are fools! Let's move further to the right to capture moderates!

-Dems

[–] brygphilomena@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

The fucking moderates are left at this point.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 4 points 4 hours ago

No, they are still fascists, have always been fascist, and only give us the least concessions they can to preserve their own offshore accounts and insider trading. They used to be controlled opposition, and they don't even bother with that, anymore.

[–] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 37 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

What I'm not shocked about is that they're so out of touch with what we want.

[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 2 points 15 minutes ago

They're not though. Every time Democrats have "voted blue no matter who" they've told their leaders that the party is on the right path.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 26 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

they're aware of what we need; they're just placing their desire to become richer ahead of it.

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 7 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Pelosian ethics is a discussion of competing conceptions of the good for Pelosi.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 10 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I haven't thought about her in a while but I kind of assumed she just turned to dust and blew away at some point.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 9 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Afaik she had a house dropped on her. Not sure who got the slippers.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago

Steven crowder is probably wearing them with a dress as we speak.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 7 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I still bet they're gonna find a way to ignore the results and give us status cuomo.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Presumably Cuomo will run 'independent' with the full support of the DNC, then when they split the vote and a Republican wins, they'll balme progressives for voting wrong in the primary

[–] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 4 hours ago

Subversion is the name of their game. They'd rather lose than put a Progressive in power.

[–] peregrin5@lemm.ee 20 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (6 children)

While I'm glad he won and the message this sends to Democrat leadership, I think making this claim: "It seems the pendulum is swinging back towards left-wing politics" is very premature.

He won a Democrat primary in a deep blue city in a blue state, the same that elected AOC.

I don't think this really signals much other than, yes NYC likes leftist candidates, as we already know from AOC. This may or may not signal any kind of larger pattern about American political feeling as a whole.

If the same doesn't happen in cities and states across the country, it will just be disregarded as a fluke.

[–] Korne127@lemmy.world 25 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

NYC is overwhelmingly democratic, but not left. They have a big share of rather conservative Democrats, which makes the victory of AOC and Mamdani even more impressive.

[–] BigDiction@lemmy.world 1 points 37 minutes ago

Also adding the main opponent, Andrew Cuomo, the former governor of New York State for a decade, had multiple credible sexual assault allegations only three years ago amongst other corruption scandals.

It’s weird he even wants to be mayor and has major credibility issues. I think if you want to call a progressive wave, an established Democrat who’s not completely fucking sketch needs to lose.

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 26 points 6 hours ago

It’s a huge poke in the eye of democrats who say anything left of Hitler loses elections.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 17 points 6 hours ago

I think part of the victory is actually showing the ability for the DNC leadership to project force is greatly diminished. They pulled out all the stops. AIPAC, DNC, The entire media apparatus, all the ad buying, the poison pill of hypocrisy, and finally, the sex pest Bill Clinton.

The victory here is very, very much that you win elections with people power, not $. The rumblings of this were actually that judicial election in Wisconsin which got Elon pushed out of the WH. And frankly, its signature was detectable in 2024 where no matter the spending, Democrats couldn't motivate voters to show up.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 6 points 5 hours ago

Almost all of my friends are big zohran fans. Even the one that's to the right of me on some issues is cautiously optimistic.

But to hear my friends' parents talk about it? Doom. Dooooom.

[–] Taco2112@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

You’re correct but I haven’t seen anyone outside of the lefty propaganda sites say that this actually moving the needle. The legacy news sites are along the line of “What does this mean?” and “Can someone like that actually be mayor of NYC?”

The way I see it, this could be a momentum swing but we need to capitalize and build around it. I understand why people were saying 3rd party candidates are a distraction during the election but now is the time to be pushing the Dems further left or coalescing around a new party. Get their ideas out there now so that even some brainwashed republicans might see the light before the mid term elections next year.

[–] Whirling_Ashandarei@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

Look at the past few mayors and immediately your point is disproven.

[–] BubblyRomeo@kbin.earth 10 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The title is very The Onion™-esque!

[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 6 points 5 hours ago

Reality has a very onion bias these days

load more comments
view more: next ›