Cuomo having the audacity to run for any office after his ignoble fall from power is equal to Anthony Weiner trying for a comeback as well. I guess they think we’re that desperate for anyone who once had a D after their name.
Wait a minute. Cuomo did nothing unforgivable. His fall from power was a big mistake on Democrats' part. He is exactly the type who could out-macho Trump and his likes at a general election. We wasted him on no-nonsense charges.
I just wanted to bring up Al Franken as a similar example. Cuomo did nothing that a sober, capable woman could not have easily stopped as I have written in another comment. Can you imagine Nancy Pelosi in a similar situation? She would have stopped such awkward advances in a second.
With all due respect, Nancy Pelosi was not working for Andrew Cuomo. The women who accused him were. When there is a power imbalance like that and women are forced to consider how saying no will impact their jobs and career trajectories, they are put in an untenable situation. As I am sure you can agree, most women just want to go to work with dignity and not have to be subjected to harassment by their boss.
When Nancy started working in politics, there were 23 women in the House altogether. If she had ever worked for Cuomo, the scenario I described would have happened the way I described it. Cuomo would not have tried anything, or if he had, he would have been slapped hard by a very furious Nancy. Sure as hell women want to go to work with dignity, without harassment from male bosses, it goes without saying.
Now if not Cuomo, who will stop Trump and Guyliner? Because they are the ones who threaten women's hard-fought position in society.
I think someone that Julie is familiar with--Katie Brennan-- might disagree with you. Being "sober" and "capable" and perhaps even "easily stopp[ing]" such an assault doesn't mean that it won't have lasting impact on the intended victim. I don't care how "valuable" the attacker might be politically; as a human being they are reprehensible and should never even be considered for future public office.
What's ironic, and should be unsettling to people on this site (particularly Julie), is that 36% of NYC's "progressives" think the same as you regarding Cuomo's prior actions. Well, maybe that 36% represent the male component.
I know exactly how actual sexual abuse affects a victim. I have been writing about violence against women forever, and I will fight it all my life. Again, can you imagine Maxine Waters or Nancy Pelosi being approached by Cuomo? He would look at the Mamas and would not even try (no, not because they are not young — it is because they are fiery). If he did try anything against either Mama, there was nothing a hard slap across the face and a few well-chosen words could not have solved. It is not like Cuomo was stalking drunk girls, underage girls, or unstable women saddled with depression or anxiety disorders. He — rudely — approached healthy adult women who had every chance to stop him. Probably even less sleazy than flattering and lying and then taking advantage of women — when someone is as crude as Cuomo, it is easy to see through him.
Seems we are okay with an actual sex abuser in the White House — Trump is a classic psychopath, a textbook definition of a dangerous predator, and he is a catalyst for all violent crimes. Domestic violence spiked since his return. Murder was at an all-time high in 2020. Hate crimes rose by 200% after his rallies. Ten girls struggle with suicidal thoughts and depression in great numbers. We should worry about THAT, not Cuomo.
I hate victim blaming as much as I hate sexual violence. I say the Cuomo case was a political attack, not an actual crime case. Around 2016, there was a lot of awareness on women’s rights and violence against women, it is stunning how it vanished. These days we do not speak up for women’s rights anymore. At most, Hillary or Jasmine Crockett do.
“I won’t vote for a deeply inexperienced candidate who refuses to acknowledge that “Globalize the Intifada” is an offensive term to his Jewish constituents.”
He…didn’t do this? He was asked about the chant and he explained what it means to many Palestinians, but he also acknowledged that it makes Jews feel unsafe and emphasized that we need to ensure the safety of Jewish New Yorkers. What else exactly did you want him to do? Lie about what the chant means?
That's very similar to saying "All Lives Matter" flags are not offensive to Black Americans because all it means is that all lives matter. Jews are feeling deeply unsafe right now. Globalizing violence against the only Jewish state in the world means that the violence will come for us next. Maybe he doesn't understand that but if he wants to represent a city with the largest Jewish population outside Israel, he probably should learn. It's just really insensitive.
If a candidate said that he wanted to spread Israeli tactics in Gaza globally, I would oppose him too. What does that have to do with exporting a violent uprising against Jews, which is what an intifada is?
I am 99.999% certain that you are being disingenuous and your new mayor does not support religious war in NYC or anywhere else outside of his constituency.
(1) “intifada” means struggle, as in a struggle for justice/civil rights.
(2) Even if it meant the Second Intifada (and here’s a hint, the name means there’s another one it could be referring to that was overwhelmingly peaceful), that started when Ariel Sharon deliberately provoked protests and Israeli security slaughtered hundreds of civilian protesters with extreme violence. I still don’t consent the suicide bombings in response, but some fucking context is in order, here.
In summary, an “intifada” is not “a violent uprising against Jews.” You’ve just decided to pretend that’s what it means so you can criticize Palestinians.
What does what is going on outside the US (I assume you are referring to genocide in Syria or Sudan?) have anything to do with NYC and its Jewish population. Globalize the intifada is undeniably a call for violence against Jews. This mayoral candidate thinks it’s okay terrorize his own Jewish constituents. That should be disqualifying.
If he isn't explicitly rejecting it then it isn't good enough. To non-Jews this might seem like a relatively minor issues, but to Jews it really is a big deal. Globalizing a war on the only Jewish state is a pretty scary concept.
It disgusts me how beholden Americans are to Israel. Israel is an EVIL state. No American should give a rat’s end for the well-being of Israel. I cannot fathom the twisted tortured logic employed to justify America’s subservience to Israel.
Let me guess, the Iranian regime are freedom loving anti-colonialists fighting the Jewish/white oppressors! People like you are one of the main reasons Democrats lost in 2024.
I am a NYer who has embraced Zohran's candidacy b/c he has taken the AOC approach: ask the people what they want. What's disturbing about this author's POV / select comments is the ease of playing the "antisemite" card against anyone who dares to criticize Israel / it's reign of terror in the Middle East. Please, those of you who don't live in my city (and some of you who do!) accept that Mamdani is an agent of change for a party in search of a soul.
Nobody is buying this. If he disavowed the phrase you would have said it’s not good enough because he didn’t explicitly mention Hamas, he didn’t call out SJP by name etc etc. Everyone knows that the reason for the antisemitism allegations is that he is a forceful critic of Israel.
You claim that the word intifada is inherently a call for violence against Jews. He explains that it isn’t meant this way, and the definition and historical meaning of the word supports his interpretation. That should be the end of the smears, but it isn’t.
Also, you don’t speak for all Jews. Stop pretending that we all share your disgusting bad faith racist view of the world.
I speak for the majority of Jews. For the record, I don't think he's an antisemite and I agree with a lot of what he says. But he's 33, doesn't know anything about running a city, a business, or anything else for that matter. And yes, you nailed it, I'm a racist!
How about we drop the micro-hazing of his language with the "failure to denounce" sophistry, and focus on his actual platform & qualifications then? It bears the stench of racism.
Like, honestly, try to see the other side’s point of view for a millisecond. They’re oppressed. They’ve been war crimed into oblivion by the genocidal maniac leading Israel. They’re trying to cling or hope for something better. Just because “intifada” was used to describe violence once doesn’t mean it’s ALWAYS about violence. And his answer was to address those nuances and emphasize that Jews should be safe.
Meanwhile, what’s your reaction? Only Jewish feelings matter.
If I still lived in the city, I’d have voted for Mamdani. I too have been extremely disappointed in the weak party gerontocracy, especially in their cowering before Trump.
As to Mamdani’s position on intifada, he wouldn’t have won the first round without a decent showing of Jewish voters. Injustice is injustice no matter who creates it.
More to the point, it should disabuse people of the false idea that Mamdani's Bulwark interview is a sign of some nefarious, disqualifying antipathy to Jewish people.
You're kidding, right? You want to gauge the pulse of NYC voters by who the Hassidim vote for?! THEY SUPPORT RFK JR.! Is THAT who you think should be deciding health issues for the US?
You just proved my previous point; for some (you!) if a pol dares to question Israel's genocidal tactics in the Middle East, it (perversely!) disqualifies them to lead a city that has 1M Muslim residents AS WELL AS a significant Jewish population.
Please, don't vote in NYC anymore; move to LI where you can hang with the rest of the phony Dems.
What? You said WILLIAMSBURG! Nice try at a save; you show your bias (and I'm sorry that I looked at your article). BTW, do you have ANY idea what's happening up at Columbia (on the UWS)? It's NOT monolithically Jewish - and oh, many Jews are ASHAMED at what Israel is doing in Gaza (clearly you're not one of them - guess you're a David Project supporter...)
1. i said the Upper West Side, Williamsburg (which is hardly monolithically Hassidic) and other Jewish enclaves.
2. Columbia is in Morningside Heights, not the Upper West Side.
3. You have no idea how I feel about what Israel is doing in Gaza but thanks for jumping to conclusions based on the fact that I don't support exporting violent uprisings globally.
Wait, what? What are you talking about?! Now you want to segment the UWS by real estate terms? Really? Do you actually live here? And, WHO SAID MAMDANI WANTS TO EXPORT VIOLENT UPRISINGS?
See, YOU really are the problem; you don't like change when it exposes the fallacy of your cherished beliefs (Israel is a strong American partner; Jews should all ban together to support Israel... or else).
That's why Zohran won; he didn't kowtow to the pro-Israeli thugs who want to label anyone who criticizes their beloved homeland. Real NYers know the way foward is to cast out the bad actors.
Take the hint - and please stop responding. It's a bad look for you.
My favorite part of this essay is "If moderate Democrats want to win again, they need to come up with better candidates and a more audacious, inspiring platform." because it proposes an impossible task. Moderates and centrists CANNOT be inspiring because they do not have actual values beyond supporting whatever their wealthiest donors want. They rallied to Cuomo because he takes orders from the wealthy elite. He doesn't care about his constituents. His being a sex pest is a minor nuisance. They supported him because he is the BEST reflection of their desire for a government that works only to prop up the wealthy consultants that prop up these shitbag politicians. Also, Mamdani is going to have to contend with a rapid NYPD, a city council who doesn't know him, and an Albany that still hates NYC. Fears of some communist takeover of the city are not just overblown, but divorced from reality and kind of sad.
For years, they got away with it like Scooby Doo villains before the mask was ripped off. The likes of Schumer, the Clintons, Obama, Pelosi, Fetterman on one side, and the Cheneys, McCains, Pauls, Murkowski, McConnell, Romney, etc. on the other. Appear to be "just different enough" to give the voters the concept of choice, while servicing the same agenda behind the scenes to funnel wealth and power to the big donor class. Extremists on both sides with evangelical and (as Ben pointed out) cultish agendas are rocking the status quo, which is why the Cheneys were so quick to endorse Harris. The Cuomos (both brothers) are absolute scum, and yet they get chance after chance for redemption and wealth building because they're the engine of the status quo. I'm not sure a true political/policy resistance will rise up anytime in the next few election cycles, if there even are more elections. Here's hoping the clock and nature will clean house to some degree in the years ahead. Fun fact, I brain fogged on Mitch McConnell's name while writing this and googled "Turtle Senator" and he came right up.
To expand a bit -- I love Obama, but look at how he waffled on gay marriage at first. He was afraid to rock the status quo until it was clear such a vote would not ripple the waters too much. Zooming out further, look at how often we elect one party to the White House, and then much of their agenda is blocked by Congress -- usually by technicalities like the filibuster. The president says, "well, we tried" and the status quo remains. Then when one party captures the White House, House, and Senate, nothing gets done due to infighting, the status quo remains, and then the midterms rebalance power and the "nothing gets done" status quo chugs along. Look no further than healthcare and infrastructure (high speed rail, water quality, bridges) -- China and Europe makes us look like a third world country because nothing ever gets done here. That's what MAGA sees in Trump -- yes, he's destroying the country, but at least in their eyes, it's change.
Yes , wake up DNC, why do you think we refuse to give to an antiquated system, of politicians anymore. Did you see, who the voted for a gentlemen, who took his time to walk and knock on doors to really understand and know the people’s concerns about this country. DNC you better figure out , what you’re going to do. I refuse to give anything at all, period. I am sick and tired of dummies running the democratic system of government. Senator Schumer, you will be gone next election, as a member of your family works at facebook. We are tired of oligarchs, I am through with mail in fund raising, I am through with the establishment period. Vice Chair David Hogg, grow up . You think you are . Well you can’t fix being stupid, can you?
Oops. Something happened at the end of your post where you talk about David Hogg. I wanted to read your thoughts there as well. Can you amend or add? We might disagree about Hogg but I am with you on all the rest.
The lesser politically engaged electorate wants to know what Democratic candidates are going to do for them specifically. Kitchen tables issues. This is why Trump won - he lied to people about how he was going to help them specifically. If you're a politically engaged Democrat, you really want a candidate to tell you how hard they're going to fight against Trump. But that messaging doesn't resonate with people who don't closely follow politics. This is where Democrats continue to fail.
At least Mamdani can surround himself with people who are experienced to make up for his lack of experience - it was doubtful Cuomo could or would surround himself with people who are ethical and have integrity to make up for his shortcomings. Not a New Yorker, but that’s my two cents as to why people went for the inexperienced guy with the rizz: they feel they can trust him.
I'm reading along and taking what you say seriously and then this "The establishment told us to disbelieve our lying eyes when Joe Biden was clearly flailing in the last year of his presidency." And now I can't trust a thing you say.
Since the Good Socialists against Evil Establishment emerged, the Democratic Party is failing. We abandoned our best causes, women's rights, green energy, environmentalism. Not sure how the world can deal with conflicts and wars as fossil fuels deplete fast and America focuses on anything but renewables. In 2016, protest voters voted for Harambe the gorilla. By now, there is no Harambe, no Cecil the lion, no women' rights, no LGBTQ rights, no stopping violence against women. All we have is tax the rich, money is evil.
We have a candidate who promises everything, we know it is not even possible, but he is "authentic."
We talk about Scandinavian states, but we forget that women's rights and civil rights are thriving there, this is how the strong social safety net and all the social programs are possible.
Cuomo a sexual predator? I wish he was the worst "sex offender," I have been studying violent crime since I was a kid. I know a predator when I see one, I write true crime. And I could kill for women's rights and for sex abuse. But Cuomo? What, he made lewd comments or gestures? We are talking about sober, capable, adult women, not a drunk kid who cannot give or deny consent. Try to do that with, say, Nancy Pelosi. She would have slapped him hard -- problem solved. By the way, Cuomo could not help elderly people during the pandemic the way he should have, but is it worth mentioning in this article?
Democrats are absurd. From defund the police to open borders to free college tuition to transitioning children to supporting Hamas to government run grocery stores to a $30 minimum wage to you name it. Democrats are the party of bad ideas, bad policies and bad governance. Look at San Francisco, Portland, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle and now New York. Democrats are destroying America.
Julie, I wholeheartedly agree with your overall point, however this nitpicking criticism also is what Democratic voters are rebelling against:
..."who refuses to acknowledge that 'Globalize the Intifada” is an offensive term to his Jewish constituents."
Our current President has enthusiastically promoted the antisemitic Great Replacement Theory, incited the Pittsburgh Synagogue Massacre, praised tiki-torch rioters who chanted "Jews will not replace us", packed his cabinet and press pool with White Nationalists & antisemites, and pardoned violent J6 Insurrectionists who donned "Camp Auchwitz" and "6MWE" T-shirts. None of this was deemed disqualifying by his Republican colleagues or the Jewish Americans who voted for him.
When Elon Musk --unapologetic platformer of neo-Nazis and White Supremacists-- publicly made a Nazi salute, *even the anti-defamation league refused to criticize him!*
Yet Mr. Mamdani is being put under the Special Amtisemitism Microscope for "refusing to acknowledge..." This double standard is another bit of malpractice that Democratic voters showed yesterday they will no longer tolerate.
I challenge every pundit & politico who complained about Mamdani's Bulwark interview to show they mean it by asking Curtis Sliwa and every elected Republican why they didn't condemn Trump for appointing antisemites to his cabinet and for pardoning violent J6 antisemites.
I agree with everything you said. Republicans are awful on antisemitism. I don't believe Mamdani is an antisemite. I also don't believe slogans like "Globalize the Intifada" belong in political discourse. He should take the opportunity to disavow it and I hope he does. I also have concerns about Mamdani that go beyond this, including his unrealistic promises that he will be unable to keep because the money simply isn't there. As for Nadler, he has his own political calculus. He speaks for himself, not anyone else.
Cuomo having the audacity to run for any office after his ignoble fall from power is equal to Anthony Weiner trying for a comeback as well. I guess they think we’re that desperate for anyone who once had a D after their name.
Wait a minute. Cuomo did nothing unforgivable. His fall from power was a big mistake on Democrats' part. He is exactly the type who could out-macho Trump and his likes at a general election. We wasted him on no-nonsense charges.
He was a serial sexual harasser, among other things. The mistake was letting Al Franken go for a poor taste photo.
I just wanted to bring up Al Franken as a similar example. Cuomo did nothing that a sober, capable woman could not have easily stopped as I have written in another comment. Can you imagine Nancy Pelosi in a similar situation? She would have stopped such awkward advances in a second.
With all due respect, Nancy Pelosi was not working for Andrew Cuomo. The women who accused him were. When there is a power imbalance like that and women are forced to consider how saying no will impact their jobs and career trajectories, they are put in an untenable situation. As I am sure you can agree, most women just want to go to work with dignity and not have to be subjected to harassment by their boss.
When Nancy started working in politics, there were 23 women in the House altogether. If she had ever worked for Cuomo, the scenario I described would have happened the way I described it. Cuomo would not have tried anything, or if he had, he would have been slapped hard by a very furious Nancy. Sure as hell women want to go to work with dignity, without harassment from male bosses, it goes without saying.
Now if not Cuomo, who will stop Trump and Guyliner? Because they are the ones who threaten women's hard-fought position in society.
I think someone that Julie is familiar with--Katie Brennan-- might disagree with you. Being "sober" and "capable" and perhaps even "easily stopp[ing]" such an assault doesn't mean that it won't have lasting impact on the intended victim. I don't care how "valuable" the attacker might be politically; as a human being they are reprehensible and should never even be considered for future public office.
What's ironic, and should be unsettling to people on this site (particularly Julie), is that 36% of NYC's "progressives" think the same as you regarding Cuomo's prior actions. Well, maybe that 36% represent the male component.
I know exactly how actual sexual abuse affects a victim. I have been writing about violence against women forever, and I will fight it all my life. Again, can you imagine Maxine Waters or Nancy Pelosi being approached by Cuomo? He would look at the Mamas and would not even try (no, not because they are not young — it is because they are fiery). If he did try anything against either Mama, there was nothing a hard slap across the face and a few well-chosen words could not have solved. It is not like Cuomo was stalking drunk girls, underage girls, or unstable women saddled with depression or anxiety disorders. He — rudely — approached healthy adult women who had every chance to stop him. Probably even less sleazy than flattering and lying and then taking advantage of women — when someone is as crude as Cuomo, it is easy to see through him.
Seems we are okay with an actual sex abuser in the White House — Trump is a classic psychopath, a textbook definition of a dangerous predator, and he is a catalyst for all violent crimes. Domestic violence spiked since his return. Murder was at an all-time high in 2020. Hate crimes rose by 200% after his rallies. Ten girls struggle with suicidal thoughts and depression in great numbers. We should worry about THAT, not Cuomo.
They WORKED for him. How do you think it would have gone for them and their careers if they had placed a "hard slap against his face?"
I'm wisely going to let the women on this site "fight" this one out. If Julie is good with Cuomo and his prior actions, I have no issues.
Speaking of sex "abusers" in the White House, remember JFK?
Wow. Making excuses for a harasser because you wrongly think he can do something about Trump. I think I smell victim blaming too.
How about not eating our own?
I hate victim blaming as much as I hate sexual violence. I say the Cuomo case was a political attack, not an actual crime case. Around 2016, there was a lot of awareness on women’s rights and violence against women, it is stunning how it vanished. These days we do not speak up for women’s rights anymore. At most, Hillary or Jasmine Crockett do.
Not eating one’s own applies to people who don’t pull unethical shenanigans. Cuomo’s case doesn’t apply.
“I won’t vote for a deeply inexperienced candidate who refuses to acknowledge that “Globalize the Intifada” is an offensive term to his Jewish constituents.”
He…didn’t do this? He was asked about the chant and he explained what it means to many Palestinians, but he also acknowledged that it makes Jews feel unsafe and emphasized that we need to ensure the safety of Jewish New Yorkers. What else exactly did you want him to do? Lie about what the chant means?
That's very similar to saying "All Lives Matter" flags are not offensive to Black Americans because all it means is that all lives matter. Jews are feeling deeply unsafe right now. Globalizing violence against the only Jewish state in the world means that the violence will come for us next. Maybe he doesn't understand that but if he wants to represent a city with the largest Jewish population outside Israel, he probably should learn. It's just really insensitive.
JFC Julie genocide is justabit insensitive too.
If a candidate said that he wanted to spread Israeli tactics in Gaza globally, I would oppose him too. What does that have to do with exporting a violent uprising against Jews, which is what an intifada is?
I am 99.999% certain that you are being disingenuous and your new mayor does not support religious war in NYC or anywhere else outside of his constituency.
Your argument is disingenuous
as all hell.
(1) “intifada” means struggle, as in a struggle for justice/civil rights.
(2) Even if it meant the Second Intifada (and here’s a hint, the name means there’s another one it could be referring to that was overwhelmingly peaceful), that started when Ariel Sharon deliberately provoked protests and Israeli security slaughtered hundreds of civilian protesters with extreme violence. I still don’t consent the suicide bombings in response, but some fucking context is in order, here.
In summary, an “intifada” is not “a violent uprising against Jews.” You’ve just decided to pretend that’s what it means so you can criticize Palestinians.
What does what is going on outside the US (I assume you are referring to genocide in Syria or Sudan?) have anything to do with NYC and its Jewish population. Globalize the intifada is undeniably a call for violence against Jews. This mayoral candidate thinks it’s okay terrorize his own Jewish constituents. That should be disqualifying.
Yeah you look credible. Good luck with that personal character you’ve got there, “Dan.”
Great point, “textbook archetypal Good Guy”. Your comments here just exude your self proclaimed Good Guy-ness.
If he isn't explicitly rejecting it then it isn't good enough. To non-Jews this might seem like a relatively minor issues, but to Jews it really is a big deal. Globalizing a war on the only Jewish state is a pretty scary concept.
It disgusts me how beholden Americans are to Israel. Israel is an EVIL state. No American should give a rat’s end for the well-being of Israel. I cannot fathom the twisted tortured logic employed to justify America’s subservience to Israel.
Let me guess, the Iranian regime are freedom loving anti-colonialists fighting the Jewish/white oppressors! People like you are one of the main reasons Democrats lost in 2024.
No. They both suck. See how easy that is?
I am a NYer who has embraced Zohran's candidacy b/c he has taken the AOC approach: ask the people what they want. What's disturbing about this author's POV / select comments is the ease of playing the "antisemite" card against anyone who dares to criticize Israel / it's reign of terror in the Middle East. Please, those of you who don't live in my city (and some of you who do!) accept that Mamdani is an agent of change for a party in search of a soul.
Nobody is buying this. If he disavowed the phrase you would have said it’s not good enough because he didn’t explicitly mention Hamas, he didn’t call out SJP by name etc etc. Everyone knows that the reason for the antisemitism allegations is that he is a forceful critic of Israel.
You claim that the word intifada is inherently a call for violence against Jews. He explains that it isn’t meant this way, and the definition and historical meaning of the word supports his interpretation. That should be the end of the smears, but it isn’t.
Also, you don’t speak for all Jews. Stop pretending that we all share your disgusting bad faith racist view of the world.
I speak for the majority of Jews. For the record, I don't think he's an antisemite and I agree with a lot of what he says. But he's 33, doesn't know anything about running a city, a business, or anything else for that matter. And yes, you nailed it, I'm a racist!
How about we drop the micro-hazing of his language with the "failure to denounce" sophistry, and focus on his actual platform & qualifications then? It bears the stench of racism.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-congressmen-endorse-mamdani-for-nyc-mayor-in-contrast-to-community-worries/
So is fucking genocide. It’s a pretty scary concept.
Like, honestly, try to see the other side’s point of view for a millisecond. They’re oppressed. They’ve been war crimed into oblivion by the genocidal maniac leading Israel. They’re trying to cling or hope for something better. Just because “intifada” was used to describe violence once doesn’t mean it’s ALWAYS about violence. And his answer was to address those nuances and emphasize that Jews should be safe.
Meanwhile, what’s your reaction? Only Jewish feelings matter.
If I still lived in the city, I’d have voted for Mamdani. I too have been extremely disappointed in the weak party gerontocracy, especially in their cowering before Trump.
As to Mamdani’s position on intifada, he wouldn’t have won the first round without a decent showing of Jewish voters. Injustice is injustice no matter who creates it.
You should check out his vote on the Upper West Side, Williamsburg and other Jewish enclaves. He did quite poorly.
Ahem... Mamdani was just endorsed by Rep. Nadler. 🤔
That's great for him.
More to the point, it should disabuse people of the false idea that Mamdani's Bulwark interview is a sign of some nefarious, disqualifying antipathy to Jewish people.
You're kidding, right? You want to gauge the pulse of NYC voters by who the Hassidim vote for?! THEY SUPPORT RFK JR.! Is THAT who you think should be deciding health issues for the US?
You just proved my previous point; for some (you!) if a pol dares to question Israel's genocidal tactics in the Middle East, it (perversely!) disqualifies them to lead a city that has 1M Muslim residents AS WELL AS a significant Jewish population.
Please, don't vote in NYC anymore; move to LI where you can hang with the rest of the phony Dems.
You think Hassidim live on the Upper West Side? Sorry, but are you familiar with New York at all?
What? You said WILLIAMSBURG! Nice try at a save; you show your bias (and I'm sorry that I looked at your article). BTW, do you have ANY idea what's happening up at Columbia (on the UWS)? It's NOT monolithically Jewish - and oh, many Jews are ASHAMED at what Israel is doing in Gaza (clearly you're not one of them - guess you're a David Project supporter...)
1. i said the Upper West Side, Williamsburg (which is hardly monolithically Hassidic) and other Jewish enclaves.
2. Columbia is in Morningside Heights, not the Upper West Side.
3. You have no idea how I feel about what Israel is doing in Gaza but thanks for jumping to conclusions based on the fact that I don't support exporting violent uprisings globally.
Have a great day.
Wait, what? What are you talking about?! Now you want to segment the UWS by real estate terms? Really? Do you actually live here? And, WHO SAID MAMDANI WANTS TO EXPORT VIOLENT UPRISINGS?
See, YOU really are the problem; you don't like change when it exposes the fallacy of your cherished beliefs (Israel is a strong American partner; Jews should all ban together to support Israel... or else).
That's why Zohran won; he didn't kowtow to the pro-Israeli thugs who want to label anyone who criticizes their beloved homeland. Real NYers know the way foward is to cast out the bad actors.
Take the hint - and please stop responding. It's a bad look for you.
My favorite part of this essay is "If moderate Democrats want to win again, they need to come up with better candidates and a more audacious, inspiring platform." because it proposes an impossible task. Moderates and centrists CANNOT be inspiring because they do not have actual values beyond supporting whatever their wealthiest donors want. They rallied to Cuomo because he takes orders from the wealthy elite. He doesn't care about his constituents. His being a sex pest is a minor nuisance. They supported him because he is the BEST reflection of their desire for a government that works only to prop up the wealthy consultants that prop up these shitbag politicians. Also, Mamdani is going to have to contend with a rapid NYPD, a city council who doesn't know him, and an Albany that still hates NYC. Fears of some communist takeover of the city are not just overblown, but divorced from reality and kind of sad.
For years, they got away with it like Scooby Doo villains before the mask was ripped off. The likes of Schumer, the Clintons, Obama, Pelosi, Fetterman on one side, and the Cheneys, McCains, Pauls, Murkowski, McConnell, Romney, etc. on the other. Appear to be "just different enough" to give the voters the concept of choice, while servicing the same agenda behind the scenes to funnel wealth and power to the big donor class. Extremists on both sides with evangelical and (as Ben pointed out) cultish agendas are rocking the status quo, which is why the Cheneys were so quick to endorse Harris. The Cuomos (both brothers) are absolute scum, and yet they get chance after chance for redemption and wealth building because they're the engine of the status quo. I'm not sure a true political/policy resistance will rise up anytime in the next few election cycles, if there even are more elections. Here's hoping the clock and nature will clean house to some degree in the years ahead. Fun fact, I brain fogged on Mitch McConnell's name while writing this and googled "Turtle Senator" and he came right up.
To expand a bit -- I love Obama, but look at how he waffled on gay marriage at first. He was afraid to rock the status quo until it was clear such a vote would not ripple the waters too much. Zooming out further, look at how often we elect one party to the White House, and then much of their agenda is blocked by Congress -- usually by technicalities like the filibuster. The president says, "well, we tried" and the status quo remains. Then when one party captures the White House, House, and Senate, nothing gets done due to infighting, the status quo remains, and then the midterms rebalance power and the "nothing gets done" status quo chugs along. Look no further than healthcare and infrastructure (high speed rail, water quality, bridges) -- China and Europe makes us look like a third world country because nothing ever gets done here. That's what MAGA sees in Trump -- yes, he's destroying the country, but at least in their eyes, it's change.
Fuck you Kremlin troll. Blocked.
Yes , wake up DNC, why do you think we refuse to give to an antiquated system, of politicians anymore. Did you see, who the voted for a gentlemen, who took his time to walk and knock on doors to really understand and know the people’s concerns about this country. DNC you better figure out , what you’re going to do. I refuse to give anything at all, period. I am sick and tired of dummies running the democratic system of government. Senator Schumer, you will be gone next election, as a member of your family works at facebook. We are tired of oligarchs, I am through with mail in fund raising, I am through with the establishment period. Vice Chair David Hogg, grow up . You think you are . Well you can’t fix being stupid, can you?
Oops. Something happened at the end of your post where you talk about David Hogg. I wanted to read your thoughts there as well. Can you amend or add? We might disagree about Hogg but I am with you on all the rest.
The lesser politically engaged electorate wants to know what Democratic candidates are going to do for them specifically. Kitchen tables issues. This is why Trump won - he lied to people about how he was going to help them specifically. If you're a politically engaged Democrat, you really want a candidate to tell you how hard they're going to fight against Trump. But that messaging doesn't resonate with people who don't closely follow politics. This is where Democrats continue to fail.
At least Mamdani can surround himself with people who are experienced to make up for his lack of experience - it was doubtful Cuomo could or would surround himself with people who are ethical and have integrity to make up for his shortcomings. Not a New Yorker, but that’s my two cents as to why people went for the inexperienced guy with the rizz: they feel they can trust him.
Zelenskyy was inexperienced too, but he more than rose to the occasion.
I'm reading along and taking what you say seriously and then this "The establishment told us to disbelieve our lying eyes when Joe Biden was clearly flailing in the last year of his presidency." And now I can't trust a thing you say.
Let's not forget Eric Adams run that will only help Silwa become mayor.
Since the Good Socialists against Evil Establishment emerged, the Democratic Party is failing. We abandoned our best causes, women's rights, green energy, environmentalism. Not sure how the world can deal with conflicts and wars as fossil fuels deplete fast and America focuses on anything but renewables. In 2016, protest voters voted for Harambe the gorilla. By now, there is no Harambe, no Cecil the lion, no women' rights, no LGBTQ rights, no stopping violence against women. All we have is tax the rich, money is evil.
We have a candidate who promises everything, we know it is not even possible, but he is "authentic."
We talk about Scandinavian states, but we forget that women's rights and civil rights are thriving there, this is how the strong social safety net and all the social programs are possible.
Cuomo a sexual predator? I wish he was the worst "sex offender," I have been studying violent crime since I was a kid. I know a predator when I see one, I write true crime. And I could kill for women's rights and for sex abuse. But Cuomo? What, he made lewd comments or gestures? We are talking about sober, capable, adult women, not a drunk kid who cannot give or deny consent. Try to do that with, say, Nancy Pelosi. She would have slapped him hard -- problem solved. By the way, Cuomo could not help elderly people during the pandemic the way he should have, but is it worth mentioning in this article?
Democrats are absurd. From defund the police to open borders to free college tuition to transitioning children to supporting Hamas to government run grocery stores to a $30 minimum wage to you name it. Democrats are the party of bad ideas, bad policies and bad governance. Look at San Francisco, Portland, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle and now New York. Democrats are destroying America.
Looking at the comments here it's no wonder Trump won. Let's stop the circular firing squad shall we.
Julie, I wholeheartedly agree with your overall point, however this nitpicking criticism also is what Democratic voters are rebelling against:
..."who refuses to acknowledge that 'Globalize the Intifada” is an offensive term to his Jewish constituents."
Our current President has enthusiastically promoted the antisemitic Great Replacement Theory, incited the Pittsburgh Synagogue Massacre, praised tiki-torch rioters who chanted "Jews will not replace us", packed his cabinet and press pool with White Nationalists & antisemites, and pardoned violent J6 Insurrectionists who donned "Camp Auchwitz" and "6MWE" T-shirts. None of this was deemed disqualifying by his Republican colleagues or the Jewish Americans who voted for him.
When Elon Musk --unapologetic platformer of neo-Nazis and White Supremacists-- publicly made a Nazi salute, *even the anti-defamation league refused to criticize him!*
Yet Mr. Mamdani is being put under the Special Amtisemitism Microscope for "refusing to acknowledge..." This double standard is another bit of malpractice that Democratic voters showed yesterday they will no longer tolerate.
I challenge every pundit & politico who complained about Mamdani's Bulwark interview to show they mean it by asking Curtis Sliwa and every elected Republican why they didn't condemn Trump for appointing antisemites to his cabinet and for pardoning violent J6 antisemites.
PS - Rep. Jerrold Nadler just endorsed Mamdani.
I agree with everything you said. Republicans are awful on antisemitism. I don't believe Mamdani is an antisemite. I also don't believe slogans like "Globalize the Intifada" belong in political discourse. He should take the opportunity to disavow it and I hope he does. I also have concerns about Mamdani that go beyond this, including his unrealistic promises that he will be unable to keep because the money simply isn't there. As for Nadler, he has his own political calculus. He speaks for himself, not anyone else.
Nicely done. Thank you.
On a lighter note:
That headline reminds me of a Mel Brooks line:
"Sire, the peasants are revolting!
You're telling me!"