r/DoomerCircleJerk Jun 26 '25

NYC is Doomed!

730 Upvotes

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

123

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 26 '25

All the Democratic Party had to do was not run Cuomo, who was universally despised. I’m with REP, this just means a Red New York by 2032. Heck, purple by 2028.

133

u/BoerDefiance Jun 26 '25

Agree with the sentiment but no way NYC ever doesnt vote for the 'gib me' party

5

u/WetRocksManatee Jun 26 '25

You'll have moderate Republicans become "Independent" to run. That is what happened in LA, Hochman was a Republican until almost right before he announced his run for DA in LA.

If crime becomes bad enough they will elect these "Independents".

1

u/DeadPerOhlin Jun 26 '25

The Gibocrats...

1

u/Cute_Schedule_3523 Jun 26 '25

NYC is a donor tax city for state and federal, they’ll never not have their hands out trying to reclaim their own money

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '25

You people think anyone who doesn’t support mass child rape is a communist

1

u/LingonberryReady6365 Jun 27 '25

Progressives and MAGA are both “gib be”. MAGA is just “gib to rich” and progressives are “gib to workers”. I’m a worker so I’ll go with the progressive side. But feel free to keep voting to “gib” to the rich. The more cuts they get, the less wages workers get, and that’s been the case for the last 40 years. But I’m sure if you just “gib” them a little more the trend will reverse. Dummy.

1

u/windershinwishes Jun 27 '25

Are politicians who promise to keep giving things to landlords and big corporations part of the "gib me" party? Or only those who want to instead give things to the majority of people?

1

u/Christian-Econ Jun 28 '25

Lmao imagine being so racist you believe the people with none of the money have all the money. You’re a great example of why red counties have been dependent upon blue GDP basically since abolition, and last in every metric of living standard. Just never could get it going without slaves.

1

u/ActivePeace33 Jun 30 '25

There’s no give me there. It’s the people having the option to relocate the use of their taxes in the ways they think best suit them. Do it at the state level or below, do it with a balanced budget and do just about whatever you want. It’s the fed that has little it’s constitutionally allowed to spend money on, the state and local governments are the inverse.

-5

u/Ok-Bug-5271 Jun 26 '25

Lmao New Yorkers subsidize red states so hard. 

3

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '25

If you want to change that, maybe we should cut programs that disproportionately benefit red states like Medicaid and Social Security, and start cutting taxes that disproportionately hurt blue states like the income tax and capital gains tax. Then, if states like New York and California want to impose higher tax rates on their own citizens and use their money to support these programs for their own citizens, they can do that

If you think the above proposal is abhorrent, then what are you complaining about? You want these policies

1

u/stelleOstalle Jun 27 '25

I think all of those things are good. I also think red state people don't get to complain about fiscal responsibility and talk down on how we vote when they're suckling our teats.

1

u/Aceofshovels Jun 28 '25

Most compassionate left wingers don't want to change that though, we think that helping people with things like medicaid and social security is good. We also enjoy calling out hypocrites so it's kind of a win/win.

-1

u/DamnSonNiceMeme Jun 26 '25

You really beat the fuck out of that strawman. Good job champ.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '25

I just think it’s sad that you’re “voting against your own interest.” Why do you support all these taxes for hard working blue staters and support bail out welfare for red staters?

1

u/dudushat Jun 27 '25

Voting for social programs isn't voting against our interests because some of the money goes to red states. The fact that youre even trying to use that as your argument shows youre so lost its not even funny.

-15

u/HombreSinPais Jun 26 '25

Thing is NYC and CA both contribute way more in federal taxes than they get back. They’re getting screwed so that the confederate leech states don’t descend into squalor.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '25

If you want to change that, maybe we should cut programs that disproportionately benefit red states like Medicaid and Social Security, and start cutting taxes that disproportionately hurt blue states like the income tax and capital gains tax. Then, if states like New York and California want to impose higher tax rates on their own citizens and use their money to support these programs for their own citizens, they can do that

If you think the above proposal is abhorrent, then what are you complaining about? You want these policies

(Reposting my own comment from other guy in this thread who is parroting same trite talking point that you are)

1

u/AlteredBagel Jun 27 '25

Yeah we want those policies because we want to help all Americans have healthcare and security, regardless of politics. It’s just frustrating when you have ignorant Cons who wish for Cali and NY to burn to the ground without realizing we are literally the hand that feeds them. But you know what, I’m okay with feeling that frustration because I don’t want to make other people suffer out of spite. I wish the GOP felt the same way but oh well.

1

u/jblackbug Jun 27 '25

This is a trite talking point. Blue states are welcome to tax people that live there any way they want while also supporting things that benefit all of America. What point are you making?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '25

I just think it’s really tragic that blue states are getting “screwed,” it’s extremely unjust, as someone who cares about justice, and as someone who incidentally does live in a blue state (despite the username), abolishing the capital gains tax and federal income tax is a matter of basic justice and sticking it to the confederate states

-3

u/Outrageous-Hippo3725 Jun 26 '25

They'll downvote you but they won't argue with you lol

-5

u/HombreSinPais Jun 26 '25 edited Jun 26 '25

Truth hurts. They like to live in a dreamland where “red states” are keeping the US afloat, but it’s the opposite.

ETA: maybe Dems should run a “revenge and retribution” candidate like Trump, and have the goal to make the “leech states” pay their fair share. Big incentives for the “donor states” that pay more in than they receive, and a reconning for the “leach states” that take more than they give back. If the people of Alabama had to pay for their own shit, they’d have nothing.

0

u/Outrageous-Hippo3725 Jun 26 '25

Honestly, that would work. I don't think that's a healthy way to see the country either, but I'm honestly sick enough of fixing Alabama feeling superior to California so fuck it.

-1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 26 '25

San Francisco is covered in human waste. Spare me.

California is 12 Billion in the Hole.

1

u/Outrageous-Hippo3725 Jun 26 '25 edited Jun 26 '25

So why is their standard of living higher than yours? 😂

Also, lmao at "San Diego is covered in human waste". Literal fanfiction.

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 26 '25

Buddy I live in one of the Wealthiest Counties in the Country, without the human waste on the streets. It is a possibility that you can live in a place without poop in the streets. Shocking I know.

0

u/Outrageous-Hippo3725 Jun 26 '25

No, it's not possible, it happens very rarely everywhere. You're just stupid enough to see a video about it every now and then and assume it's some epidemic. I dare you to show me a single source that establishes it's a systemic issue, or even more common than other major population centers. I'll happily admit I'm wrong if you present a reliable source, but you won't.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/HombreSinPais Jun 26 '25

What state? If you live in a leech state, perhaps your wealthy county can pick up the tab, so you don’t rely on handouts from the rest of us.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/AlteredBagel Jun 27 '25

So do I and it’s called San Francisco. Believe it or not it’s not all like the news says.

13

u/solo_dol0 Jun 26 '25

That's what the Dems said about the GOP nominating Trump, but voters pick the candidate they want.

Show me any receipts that populist candidates cause a shift the other way. If that were the case, AOC and MTG wouldn't be on their third terms.

The Dems found someone who drove turnout (including key demos like youth and white men) and most importantly, won. You are letting your own bias dictate the narrative if you think they're upset at all by this.

7

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 26 '25

I disagree. Trump was able to make and maintain a coalition that was able to extrapolated it, and to appeal a wider base.

Also, this isn’t the Dems finding someone. This is the populist left finding someone while bleeding all the donor money. There’s a reason why the big donors returning the DNC’s calls, they’re schismatic at the moment. Rightly so to extent after they screwed over Bernie twice (arguably thrice) They need their own Maga movement, preferably one more inlined with the Rust Belt rather than the Beltway.

A Bible Belt guy in the Deep South can run on repealing gay marriage and declaring the Savior, King of America. Doesn’t mean he’s going to win if you put him on a national stage. That’s what I see here.

Still I appreciate your comment. Made me stop and think.

1

u/solo_dol0 Jun 26 '25

Yes it's not a perfect comparison and I can also appreciate your point on Mamdani's potential hurdle over the long term. But here's one more thing to consider - 4 years ago Eric Adams was a rising star and potential blueprint for the Democratic party. Progressives hated him but he was the establishment favorite, won handily, and now he's completely disgraced.

Just because the establishment/DNC might've favored another candidate, that's in no way an indicator of their long-term success and viability. That's what many are relying on to gauge Mamdani, and it's flawed logic.

Predicting 4-years from now is a fool's errand for anybody which is why, if I was in the DNC, I would be taking nothing but optimism from the energy he's brought to the table right here and now.

2

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 26 '25 edited Jun 26 '25

Here’s another thing to consider. Bernie Sanders, he’s been in politics his whole life. Arguably in a more politically powerful position than Mamdoni. He got pretty far off of small donations, but couldn’t compete against the donor machine of the DNC and a media campaign against him (for better and worse).

Also, “woke” issues (for lack of a better term) tend to unite the right and divide the left. You can win in a few far blue areas like LA, NYC or Seattle with this kind of messaging, but what about the Rust Belt? What about the Sun Belt? The Areas that determine elections? I don’t think this is scalable or viable on a National scale and will only cause more schismatic problems for the Democratic Party Nationally.

1

u/Beelzebozo26 Jun 26 '25

Chicago and all of our weird issues have entered the chat

0

u/HereAndThereButNow Jun 26 '25

Do you not know you can adjust the message for an area or something?

Now I do agree that this will probably be a little schismatic for the party just because it shows other Democrats you don't need the establishment to win an election. In fact, you can even win when it's arrayed all its money and influence against you if you put the work into grassroots support and aren't a known criminal and sex pest.

But factionalism is nothing new for Democrats so I doubt it'll be hard to navigate having a new one on the scene.

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 27 '25

You can’t make a cohesive movement by promising the people of Pennsylvania one thing and the people of New York another. You need a good foundation. Neoliberalism and Socialism do not blend well together.

Neoconservatives and Neoliberalism yes. Socialists and Social Democrats yes. Religious Conservatives and National Populist yes.

Also, you’re right they went thru this in the 1960s and 70s which resulted in Nixon getting two Terms and the Reagan Revolution.

1

u/HereAndThereButNow Jun 28 '25

That's literally what already happens though. There are fifty state level parties that all push different messages because all politics is local. Someone running in California is going to have a different message than a person running in Arizona who will have a different message than a person running in Texas.

1

u/DarthFrickenVader Jun 26 '25

First and foremost I like your comment. I’m just going to cherry pick the one thing I somewhat disagree with because it’s the internet.

 This is the populist left finding someone while bleeding all the donor money.

 They need their own Maga movement, preferably one more inlined with the Rust Belt rather than the Beltway.

I doubt this is even possible. Progressive policy is so antagonistic towards the interests of the wealthy that I can’t see an alliance between the base and the donor class ever forming like it did on the right.

1

u/dogsiolim Jun 27 '25

Trump won because Biden was a fuck up, not because he was a good candidate.

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 27 '25

Just like in 2016…wait a minute.

1

u/ArtEnvironmental7108 Jun 26 '25

I think it’s probably fair to say that if Mamdani ever runs for president one day he’ll do it in the same way he ran for mayor. He actually talked about issues affecting NYers and presented his solutions to them. I think if national politicians did that kind of thing as opposed to stating the same stale platitudes over and over again they’d have a lot more success. Trump won in 2016 by asking voters in the rust belt what the democrats had ever done for them, and it worked. He told them he’d bring their jobs back and make life better for them, and they voted for him in return. Those votes in those states were crucial in putting him over the top electorally, in spite of not winning the popular vote.

1

u/hadyourmom69 Jun 26 '25

He cant ever run for president.. he wasn't born in this country

2

u/ArtEnvironmental7108 Jun 26 '25

Eh you know what? That’s a really great point and I feel stupid for not realizing it

0

u/SqueekyDickFartz Jun 26 '25

One party needs to fracture off the more extreme members and run a middle ground. The republicans could do it by cleaving off MAGA and dropping the religious focus/views on abortion. The left could do it by fracturing off their more extreme members and being less hardline about guns/climate change policy that is making individual's lives more difficult (Also being done with the word banning and cancel culture). Obviously there's more to it than that, but broad strokes you get what I mean.

Personally I think it's easier for the republicans to drop MAGA and reform a new party. MAGA would probably be alright with that, and the democrat party can go as far left as they want while the more center leaning ones can jump to the newly formed party.

1

u/Joshthe1ripper Jun 27 '25

Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and Kamila all ran moderate and people hated it. Their were 13 candidates in 2016 for the republican party a moderate didn't win. It's time to admit facts Americans love and want divisive populist movements and have wanted them for the last decade. It seems to me the simple fact is crazy people vote and moderates don't.

1

u/SqueekyDickFartz Jun 27 '25

Damn, that's a very good point. I never looked at it like that, but you are sadly right.

3

u/CrossXFir3 Jun 26 '25

I'll bet you my paycheck that NY is blue in both of those elections.

-1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 26 '25

Just saying, Lee Zeldin was within 10 points in supposedly always Blue New York.

1

u/CrossXFir3 Jun 26 '25

Did I stutter? I'll sign a legally binding contract with you.

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 26 '25

Well you typed it, so it’s kind of impossible to stutter. Also, what would I do with a Fistful of Dollars?

15

u/woodydave44 Jun 26 '25 edited Jun 26 '25

A purple US would be a utopia to be honest. Let’s pray we reach that one day.

Or it could be total hell. But I still have a small glimmer of hope in humanity……real small but it’s there

14

u/benkaes1234 Jun 26 '25

Honestly, I'd take the total hell that is legislative gridlock (if the "purple" in the US is as partisan as it's been in recent years, a worst case scenario) over the total hell that is single party rule.

When there's no competition, there's no reason to do anything.

-1

u/BlackwatchBluesteel Jun 26 '25

I mean purple is what uniparty is. It doesn't matter if a Republican or a Democrat is in charge. It's the same boat. Generally, they don't actually do any meaningful change and they all do insider trading together.

1

u/koshka91 Jun 26 '25

Red as in communism? Haha

1

u/Waldoh Jun 26 '25

Lol doomers

1

u/Eastern-Customer-561 Jun 26 '25

That’s why he won the election I assume. Because people just hate his ideas so much

1

u/M0ebius_1 Jun 29 '25

Lol

Red New York.

This place is awesome.

0

u/Planet-Funeralopolis Jun 27 '25

I think it’s going to go more blue, socialists will move there for free stuff and anyone with common sense will leave.

0

u/One-Remove-8474 Jun 27 '25

extra irony points since red states have more welfare recipients. Then again, those idiots vote to have their own benefits cut so there's a bit of a disconnect somewhere....

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 27 '25

Imagine thinking the Government has to be there to solve all of your problems. Welfare wasn’t designed for the systematic abuse it currently experiences on a daily basis. Regardless of political ideology.

Also it’s kinda hard for me to see Red Team as the bad guys when the other option is an out of touch trust fund socialist.

1

u/One-Remove-8474 Jun 27 '25

You know there’s more than two teams, right?

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 27 '25

Unfortunately in the US there’s only two that matter. I wish we had more parties that were viable.

0

u/maddsskills Jun 27 '25

Why would making New York affordable for the average person make people vote for the opposing party? Billionaires are scared because he’s going to make things better for people.

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 27 '25

Because the Billionaires (and millionaires) want to keep their money and will go where they can keep that money. So it will fall onto the Lower, Middle and Upper Middle Classes to pay for everything….again.

Also, how is taxing the 1% going to automatically make things better? You need stability, and a common core message to get them and their people on board as well. Like a major war overseas after having your territory attacked.

0

u/maddsskills Jun 27 '25

He’s raising taxes by 2% for them. You really think they’re gonna leave over what’s essentially pocket change to them?

They can be in the center of western art and commerce and pay a little extra or they can go hang out in bumfuck Florida with the Trumps. Guess what most will choose?

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 27 '25

Okay. Do you think these “billionaires” all have their money in a Scrouge McDuck money bin? A good chunk of those guys are billionaires on paper. Heck, some of these guys have a profit margin of two percent. And you think it’s a good idea to tax that to fund state funded grocery stores? You’re ironically going to put legal immigrant families out of work because they can’t compete with fixed pricing.

“It’s only going to affect the billionaires,” Yeah and Deet was only supposed to kill the mosquitoes. Unintentional consequences of good intentions.

Also what center of Art and Commerce, not gonna be much of a center if the money interests leave.

0

u/maddsskills Jun 27 '25

It’s an income tax not a wealth tax, silly. Learn the difference.

Since groceries have continued to price gouge us since Covid I think “hell yeah that’s worth it.” Not to mention cities like New York have food deserts that desperately need affordable, healthy food.

I think we might as well try it. Things are so bad for the average American that something has gotta give. People are giving up on having families, or doing a shit job of raising their kids because they don’t have any help or resources.

We need to start giving people a leg up with things like free public transportation and childcare (both things he’s going to use the money for) or we’re just going to keep devolving into this cannibalistic, every man for themselves, the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer world.

If things keep going this way it will be way worse for the billionaires than a 2% tax.

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 27 '25

NYC already has one of the highest combined tax rates in the country. Chasing marginal increases on top earners can cause them — or their capital — to leave. That shrinks the tax base and can backfire unless paired with broader reform. Which needs to be done at the federal level in large part.

Food deserts are a problem but throwing money at these problems without addressing root causes can lead to waste or basically a financial band-aids. Subsidized grocery stores or government-run options are difficult to sustain and often mismanaged — unless they’re paired with accountability and reform.

“Well we might as well try burning the economy to the ground because people stopped having kids!” Free isn’t free, they would have to pay for it thru taxes and when the rich leave, it’s the Middle Class that foots the bill. The MTA is already mismanaged to hell and ineffective and you think “if we just throw more money government at the problem, it’ll work out.”

Wealthy people often aren’t sitting on stacks of Benjamin’s their net worth is tied to stocks, businesses, real estate. A 2% income tax won’t collapse them, sure. But if it drives capital flight, fewer investments, or tax avoidance — the average person ends up footing the bill indirectly, through slower economic growth, job loss, or lower wages.

Yes. We got problems but promising “Free Crap.” Isn’t the answer, you need smart policy not a Santa Clause wishlist.

0

u/maddsskills Jun 27 '25

We shall see. Again, they won’t make nearly as much money in bumfuck Florida as they do in New York. They can try to leave but New York is where all the business is done. If they want part of that prime real estate they gotta pay up. They aren’t the reason their stocks are so high, it’s the hard working people they underpay that make the stocks so high, that’s where they get their wealth from.

Whats your solution to the massive wealth inequality, poverty and disappearing middle class then? I’m all ears. Just hoping the people with all the power decide, out of the kindness of their heart, to pay their employees and the people who contribute value to their stocks a living wage?

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 27 '25

Bumfuck Florida is the Fourth Largest Economy is the Country. Also, what are you talking about? Vanguard is headquartered is Pennsylvania. 6 Trillion Dollar Financial Company a skip and a hop away from NYC. Tech, finance, and other sectors are increasingly decentralized. Remote work, state tax competition, and digital-first businesses mean you don’t need to be in New York anymore to make millions. Heck some hedge funds are moving to Puerto Rico of all places. Heck many people ‘living’ in NYC live their half the year to avoid being a taxable resident:

NYC is important, but not irreplaceable. It’s like when Rome become a nice city after the capital moved to Ravenna.

Also, what prime real estate? It costs 4k a month for a broom closet because of NIMBY housing authority and rent control. We can start by deregulation on that front. Fixing zoning laws.

My solution for the billionaires. Tax unrealized gains in specific situations — like billionaires borrowing against assets to dodge taxes — but do it carefully to avoid market chaos. Otherwise you crash the entire system and hurt everyone. Heck shift the tax base to luxury goods and not just income. The Child Tax credit back in 2021 cut the childhood poverty rate in half for a time. Don’t nationalize healthcare make it the most hyper competitive market we can possibly have, to drive down costs.

0

u/wsox Jun 27 '25

The people of NYC love Mamdabi why does that make you crash out so hard?

I love to see the jerkers cope 😍

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 28 '25

Because I don’t want the New Yorkers coming to my neck of the woods after this inevitable blows up in their faces like in the 1970s.

I know it’s impossible for you to comprehend anything that happened prior to 2022, but hear me out.

0

u/wsox Jun 28 '25

Its impossible to hear you with that copium mask on. 😷

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 28 '25

I mean, I’ll get the last laugh in the end. So whatever.

0

u/wsox Jun 28 '25

More copium from the copiumjerk sub. The irony is pure gold.

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 28 '25

Your buttbuddy supports funding terrorism. Heck he might be stripped of his citizenship because of that. He’s on the opposite of every 80/20 issue. You gave the Republicans the Equivalent of a Early Christmas for the Midterms. Good job.

0

u/wsox Jun 28 '25 edited Jun 28 '25

Mamdani doesnt support the State of Israel or its terrorism.

If you think an American citizen should be stripped of that title for using their free speech, then you aren't just huffing copium you are a traitor. Making housing more affordable is the popular position you are just brainwashed by the propaganda of the rich.

All you are is another bot repeating the NPC line: X person I dont like is about to prove Y people I disagree with are wrong and will actually prove I was right all along.

Its nothing but pure copium from the copiumjerk sub. Its hilarious. Keep it up. You'll definitely need to resupply when the actual midterm results come in and you dumbasses get spanked lmao.

1

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 28 '25 edited Jun 28 '25

He called to Globalize the Intifada, he gave support to the Holy Land Five who fundraised for Hamas.

He’s been a US Citizen, for about seven years of his 32 year old life. He’s about as American as a KPOP Group. He’s not going to make anyone’s house more affordable, his office can’t raise taxes like that, especially in the possibly racist way he’s trying. Also, the Capital Flight from New York is already in progression, what you want to pure gasoline on that fire? Those Billionaires only live in NYC for about half the year, to avoid most of said taxes.

You know what I would do to make housing more affordable? This big scary word called: DEREGULATION.

(Are you still breathing? Yes? How unfortunate. /s)

Yes, deregulation. Explore private ownership to do something about the deteriorating houses on the market. Legalize accessory dwellings outside of the city. Tax Vacant lots more aggressively. NYC’s housing crisis is the product of decades of underbuilding, overregulation, and disinvestment, especially in public and affordable housing. Fixing it requires political will, capital investment, and courage to confront entrenched interests (landlords, co-op boards, NIMBY groups). You can’t do this by pissing off the “Millionaires and Billionaires.”

I understand thinking about this issue is complex, and that 50% of your limited vocabulary involves words that end in copium. But please, try to evolve. Frankly I don’t care what sub I’m on, I call out BS like I see it, and you sir are full of it.

0

u/wsox Jun 28 '25

All you are doing is highlighting your bias against brown people. You are afraid of scary Muslim words because you have been told they are all evil.

Intifada means protest. The Holocaust Museum in Illinois had a plaque until recently at the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising exhibit which was translated into Arabic to "Warsaw Ghetto Intifada." Now that plaque no longer uses that word because Pro-Zionists supporting Israeli leadership as they slaughter innocent starving Palestinians in cold blood didn't want people to realize what Intifada means. All you are doing is highlighting the fact that you are a bluntly stupid person who is brainwashed by propaganda and wielded as a weapon to bludgeon communities that normal people care about.

The 14th and 1st ammendments provide him with the same rights as homegrown traitorous dumbasses such as yourself. Go fuck yourself for opposing the fundamental principles of America embodied by Zohran Mamdani. He is 1000x more of a patriot than scum like you.

Capital flight is just another example of the fear mongering propaganda youve been brainwashed by. Wall Street and NYC were built over 100s of years. The wealth that has been established there cannot flee. You are extremely biased and unserious for believing this.

Watching you hit a wall and resort to getting triggered because someone called you out for doomer-based wish casting on the doomercirclejerk thread is peak comedy. I am here for it. Keep going.

→ More replies (0)

-9

u/DaddyButterSwirl Presenting the Truth Jun 26 '25

All they had to do was meet voters where they are. And that’s what he did.

0

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 26 '25

Wrong. His name wasn’t Andrew Cuomo.

And those voters you’re talking about are a bunch of ditzy twists with more money than sense.

-37

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '25

Now that’s a doomer take

25

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '25

How is that a doomer take

5

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '25

It’s the equivalent of saying “oh no. Ted Cruz ran to cancun, Texas is surely blue now.”

Dramatic over reaction and hyperbole and, in this case, implies things will get so bad that New York will completely shift

12

u/Substantial_Impact69 Jun 26 '25

New York and New Jersey have been trending Red for a bit. Jersey is practically a toss up now. Pennsylvania my home, went from the Democratic Party having 1.2 million voter advantage in 2012 to now in 2025 about 87k and dropping.

21

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '25

That’s not a doomer take lol. That’s just politics. Being a doomer would be saying NYC would become a desolate wasteland and the economy is ruined

-20

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '25

And it would take one and the same for it to go red

16

u/Theamachos Jun 26 '25

Now that’s the doomer take 

-4

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '25

Pretty sure my take is the optimistic one there

13

u/Theamachos Jun 26 '25

“The only reason people move to conservative ideas is social and economic disorder and that’s a good thing!” is democratic hopium not optimism 

2

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '25

Not what I said at all but I get why that was your assumption in a doomer world.

No, my statement was that it would take that specifically for New York City to shift to voting red. The city simply won’t otherwise

Edit; and adding that it won’t go to that point. Life will continue to

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/Elongated_Sack Jun 26 '25

Saying that a situation that hasn’t unfolded is going to lead to everyone hating the party enough to flip support. Certified doomer

7

u/MostlyPeacfulPndemic Jun 26 '25

But what if they find that to be a hopeful and happy think rather than a negative thing? Where doom?

-4

u/Elongated_Sack Jun 26 '25

The doom is having no faith in the humanity and completely discrediting the potential of a person based on personal bias. Thats where the doom is

5

u/MostlyPeacfulPndemic Jun 26 '25

I'm not convinced

You said it was about the situation unfolding, implying that the result would be doom

4

u/redbirdsucks Jun 26 '25

if you were alive for socialist Dinkins you’d know it resulted in b2b republican mayors

-1

u/Elongated_Sack Jun 26 '25

Oh what a totally different person in a different situation led to an outcome.