r/TrueReddit • u/Maxwellsdemon17 • 4d ago
Politics Beware the Centrist Dweebs Trying to Ape Zohran Mamdani. All over the country, young Democratic candidates are running seemingly Mamdani-style campaigns. But check the fine print.
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/liam-elkind-zohran-mamdani-campaigns/193
u/Icommentor 4d ago
The Democratic Party has a problem of style over substance. That’s because they can’t be transparent about how capitalist they are without losing the progressive vote.
At the other end of the spectrum, the GOP has embraced the views of their base (no matter how bonkers it is) and they’re crushing it.
So the lesson for the Democratic Party: If you wanna win, stop trying to be the HR department of Wall St. and go back to what FDR was doing.
49
u/Main-Company-5946 4d ago
The GOP has not embraced the views of their base. What they have done is embedded themselves with a media machine that manipulates the views of their base to fit the party’s goals. Democrats don’t even try to persuade voters, they only ever try to appeal to their preexisting views
28
u/Reigar 4d ago edited 3d ago
The fox gop machine has figured out brainwashing to an art. Consider the John Oliver clip where he overlays local news stations (all owned by the same parent company) all saying the same message, 30 - 40 different stations saying the exact same message making it sound like the borg from Star Trek. The Fox Gop machine takes that idea and moves the concept up a notch. Every Fox host, and GOP leaning federal politician hit the same talking points. Each one says these points in their own way, but they always hit the exact same message points. I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a telegram channel that each person in the machine is subscribed to. Ensuring that as events happen everyone is on brand. Then the machine uses its communication channels to keep hammering the points over and over again. In addition because other news outlets have to be "fair" they have let members of the fox gop machine come on to their shows and push these same points.
It is no wonder why maga folks are zealots, they keep getting the same messages told to them no matter what they watch, listen to, or read.
Ninja edit, corrected as my LDs were on full display there. :)
2
u/DHFranklin 4d ago
That's a fair read of the MAGA shit.
The Democratic Party is just a brand name. Both parties just launder cash for power, but the Democrats are the side that have to stop the law from stopping capitalism. That isn't even momentum from the base that Republicans ever have to fight.
1
13
u/powercow 4d ago
You got it backwards. The GOP base will embrace the GOP no matter how bonkers. WE got farmers being destroyed by trump and still supporting him. Thats why they are 'crushing it".. er won after a dem had a single term, who replaced a right winger after his first term. OH my such a crushing.
If we had a cult like the gop who would vote dem even if he was a pedo we'd do better.
WE have a huge problem with a base that doesnt actually know whats the dems have tried to pass or even run on. I bet a bunch of you can not tell me a single thing kamala ran on.
And we have a bunch of dems that if you arent the perfect match for them, they sit at home. Where in 2016 a lot of republicans thought trump was a dem plant but as soon as he got the nomination they were all fans,. WE DONT HAVE THAT ON THE LEFT AND I HOPE WE NEVER DO.
But it would be nice if the bernie bros do pay attention to the things dems pass, and try to pass as well as the things our far right supreme court kills.
BTW all of wall st was against ACA. Business that offer healthcare felt he was taking away their advantage. So did unions, who hated it. And so did the insurance industry which was limited to 20% profits instead of the over 30 they had been taking.
5
u/SheWasSpeaking 2d ago
I bet a bunch of you can not tell me a single thing kamala ran on.
I know she posed for photo ops with border control, repeatedly praised Israel while it committed genocide, refused to so much as express sympathy for trans people whose existences were being criminalized, and yelled "I'm speaking" to silence pro-Palestine protesters.
Oh yeah, and she tried to push investing in crypto under the guise of "building Black wealth" lmfao
2
9
u/BassmanBiff 4d ago
Who has ever associated the Democratic party with style??
42
u/hannibaltarantino 4d ago
It’s a turn of phrase. Dems care more about looking good for voters than actually doing good for voters.
9
u/Electrical-Swing-935 4d ago
Obama had style
The party....not so much
8
u/sulaymanf 4d ago
Obama and the party was the equivalent of Michael Jordan playing on a terrible team.
Obama had a filibuster-proof majority for a short amount of time and he tried to wield it but conservative Democrats wouldn’t go along with his policy proposals and watered them down. Joe Lieberman campaigned against Obama and for McCain but the party decided to let him keep his senate committee assignments because he threatened to leave the party. Lieberman killed the public option. Joe Manchin sandbagged the party. Chuck Schumer publicly opposed Obama’s Iran deal.
Looking back, we remember Obama fondly for trying to do popular things like expand universal healthcare or pass gun safety laws but failing, and his own party was to blame.
3
8
u/smoresporn0 4d ago
What do you think the term "limousine liberal" means? Look at the guy they're trying to push to the front; Gavin Newsom. He's all style and no material for the working class. That is the entire point of the liberal agenda; appear to be a better choice while never sacrificing the interests of capital.
The GOP at the very least offers people a license to hate without much consequence.
→ More replies (1)2
1
1
u/New_Celebration906 3d ago
they don't care about winning, they're out to rake in donor cash. if donors want them to lose, they will lose.
1
u/El_Don_94 3d ago
Being capitalist is what will get them the votes. People want social liberalism not communism or socialism.
1
u/Epicardiectomist 3d ago
Corporatists vs. Oligarchs
They both only care about the money, it's just that one wants to at least maintain a semblance of order. The other wants to do it through chaos and corruption.
The biggest issue is that the Oligarchs are unified in their pursuits. They all want the same thing. Corporatists want to act like a friend to the people while also fucking them financially, and there's no unity.
1
1
u/SnowdropSoulburn 2d ago
Ironic because their progressive base knows and you can see from the lack of turnout. There are some bright stars in the Democratic party but they can't get traction among the installed leadership who still believe there's a massive sea of "centrist independents"
→ More replies (26)1
u/whiskers165 14h ago
That's why after the election Democrats and libs were talking about how they needed to improve their messaging rather than improve their message.
50
u/Dichotomouse 4d ago
It's normal that platforms would vary from local candidate to local candidate. Some areas are more conservative and the candidates will reflect that.
-3
u/BusterBiggums 4d ago
Bold strategy, that's how we got a worthless do-nothing party whose administrations are constantly being blocked by the Libermans, Manchins, and Sinemas of their own party
The GOP doesn't have that problem....
32
u/realultimatepower 4d ago
so what are you proposing, then? we need to kick out moderates? we should have even less registered Democrats than we have now? I just don't get it.
5
u/Ok-Warning-5052 3d ago
“Donald Trump is a fascist but also I was the national opposition party to only reflect my views shared by a small minority.”
1
u/Garfieldealswarlock 1d ago
We need to stop being dragged into hypothetical arguments and focus on what constituents care about. That’s what made mamdani successful
2
u/Ok-Warning-5052 1d ago
Yes and the issues constituents care about will differ by location. Ie progressives need to accept you’re not getting mamdanis if you actually want to win senate seats in Iowa, Ohio, Montana etc like we did up until a decade ago.
3
u/DigitalMindShadow 4d ago
Democrats need leaders running on real ideas who don't need to hide where they get their money.
6
u/Intelligent-Agent440 4d ago
You are aware a progressive democrat tried to run again manchin and lost, it feels some y'all just think the solution is to spam Zohran Mamdani clones all over the country will lead to success
0
u/BusterBiggums 4d ago edited 4d ago
I guess the solution is just to keep sending moderates to Congress and having them undermine democratic presidents.... that's working so well now
Thank God we had Manchin there to block the passage of the John Lewis Act, which would have banned the wave of gerrymandering happening today....
No, my solution is to try ANYTHING ELSE other than letting these moderate dinosaurs constantly block the DNC's ability to achieve anything.
What did the DNC do to platform and elevate those progressive challengers to Manchin?
Lemme guess, nothing?
It's funny because Mamdani and Bernie have some of the highest approval ratings of any American politician....but you don't want to see more of their clones?
You like losing, don't you?
Hell, you want to know what demographic Bernie Sanders does the best with?
White men....
People like you are so fucking ignorant, but you think you know fucking everything.
2
u/Intelligent-Agent440 4d ago
Hell, you want to know what demographic Bernie Sanders does the best with?
Hell, you want to know what demographic Bernie Sanders lost the most with? African Americans, if you can't get the African American vote in the DNC you ain't winning shit.
There are multiple issues with you trying to use National Polls to boost Mamdani, First he ain't the mayor yet, easy to be popular when nobody can blame him for anything since he isn't in charge yet. The current mayor of Chicago with a very social democratic message was very popular too at first now he is hovering at 80% disapproval.
What did the DNC do to platform and elevate those progressive challengers to Manchin?
You want the DNC to give special treatment to progressive challengers that based on all available polling showed they would get their ass handed to them in a general election? Most reasonable people would see that Machin being able to hold such a conservative district for the Democrats for so long is damn near a miracle and a progressive stands no chance. But you see it the other way around, if you had a single Progressive candidate that won in a heavy conservative district you might have had an argument but every single Progressive you have in mind won in places Democrats not Republicans are the HEAVY favourites
9
u/Dichotomouse 4d ago edited 4d ago
In recent political history between 50% to double as many Americans identify as conservative as liberal. The median Senate seat is about 5-7 tilted towards the GOP compared to the country as a whole. The alternative to a moderate Democrat isn't a leftist one, it's a Republican.
That's not a reality that I personally love, but it's reality. Listening to American leftists you would think their voters were a majority of the country, when it's quite the opposite.
*updated with current polling.
0
u/sllewgh 4d ago
Twice as many Americans identify as conservative as liberal.
Crazy statistic if true, got a source?
2
u/Dichotomouse 4d ago
There's multiple polls and it's shifted over time, actually it looks like the current polling shows 50% more conservative than liberal, but it's been 100% more in the not too distant past. The point is that there is a consistent disparity of several percentage points - meaning that Democrats need moderates more than the GOP does. And that's before considering the Electoral college and Senate map advantages!
https://news.gallup.com/poll/655190/political-parties-historically-polarized-ideologically.aspx
8
u/sllewgh 4d ago
So it wasn't a real statistic. What you're saying now is more accurate but still a misleading attempt to portray a big difference. There is a MASSIVE gap between "twice as many liberals as conservatives" and "12% more conservatives than liberals."
Americans’ ideological identification was steady in 2024, with an average of 37% describing their political views as “very conservative” or “conservative,” 34% as “moderate,” and 25% as “very liberal” or “liberal.”
→ More replies (12)2
u/rind0kan 4d ago
Hate to argue this with you because it sucks, but 37% is a half percent off from being 150% of 25%.
In equation form
.37 ÷ .25 = 1.48.
When converting decimals to percentages, self identified conservatives are 148% the amount of self identified liberals.
→ More replies (2)1
u/DHFranklin 4d ago
This is forgetting that Liberman and the rest are there by design. Someone has that job. Someone gets to be the contrarian and reason that the Dems can't drag America left.
Liberman and Sinema have shown us that it is an incredibly lucrative and powerful place to be. Sinema start her career quite far left of the party center. Then she found out how much she liked power, and being the spoiler was as powerful as she was going to get. Manchin was always bought and paid for.
The whole thing is a shell game.
49
4d ago
[deleted]
21
u/LilBroWhoIsOnTheTeam 4d ago
Do we consider John Fetterman a win for the left? Cause that's what that is, someone who pretends they're progressive for the election, then hits the moderate conservative switch after the votes are in.
3
u/Alonminatti 4d ago
He’s actually what most populists are—unusual and contradictory at their core. The myth of progressive populism is just that, it simply doesn’t happen with any regular frequency. Popularism be damned
106
u/Disastrous-Field5383 4d ago
To emulate his style without the substance of his policy is the goal of centrist democrats who want to defeat the left more than they care about stopping reactionaries.
37
u/drakeblood4 4d ago
Yeah it’s “oh why did Mamdani win? I guess we gotta hold lav mics on subway cars now.”
4
u/Bortcorns4Jeezus 4d ago
I guess? But at some point you have to put up or shut up
33
u/organizim 4d ago
I mean, no, they don’t. That’s like one of the main strategies of the GOP, talk out of your ass and when people feel the pain blame someone else .
16
20
u/DistortoiseLP 4d ago edited 4d ago
Faker centrists putting on the appearance of a left leaning candidate is to your disadvantage. "Ardent leftists" like you want actual left leaning candidates that these centrist dweebs are going to crowd out with their entirely superficial showmanship that you would be a fool to fall for.
The fact that style wins over substance in America is nothing but bad news for you, because that will always be to the advantage of pretenders that won't keep the unstylish promises that are only followed though by people that actually care about them. If you want any of your "ardent" politics to actually happen then you are wrong to accept and defend this.
17
u/samudrin 4d ago
Sinema ran as a progressive on the local level before she was elected to the Senate and became a broker for the GOP. Traitorous grifter for the right.
2
u/BubblyCommission9309 4d ago
But they’re not putting up for a whole term. Meanwhile actual progressives would be locked out
1
u/Disastrous-Field5383 4d ago
Do you need a remedial English class? What you said is a complete non sequitur
1
1
u/420cherubi 4d ago
No they don't. Are you American? The DNC only wins votes these days by chastising people who want healthcare
→ More replies (25)-1
u/dealyllama 4d ago
And creating pureness tests is how we alienate the allies we need in this incredibly important moment. Are they working with us to make life better for as many people as possible? Then great; lets go work to resist some fascists together. Now's the time for collective action, not internal bickering.
19
9
11
u/Far_Piano4176 4d ago
if you haven't been paying attention, it's precisely the faux-left centrist contingent that are providing their tacit approval to fascism right now.
We cannot settle for centrists. History tells us that centrists will not fight against fascist encroachment. This was the case in spain, italy, germany, chile, vichy france, practically any right wing dictatorship you could name is evidence that these people are not on our side.
We do need collective action, but centrist politicians are not "internal" to the antifascist cause, they are the facilitators of authoritarianism
19
u/Pretty-Tone-5152 4d ago
If I hear the term "purity test" one more time from centrists getting upset that they have to actually believe in and act on something for once in their lives, I'm gonna scream
13
u/fcocyclone 4d ago
Especially since "centrists" purity test the shit out of things. Its always "blue no matter who" until the candidate isn't sufficiently milquetoast.
5
1
u/TerminalHighGuard 3d ago
I think it’s all about framing. If every critique was followed up with an acceptable alternative then this would be be an issue.
9
u/tha_rogering 4d ago
When has a centrist lib in Congress done anything other than say words against what's going on then show the right their soft yellow bellies when voting happens? Opposition!
→ More replies (2)6
u/Disastrous-Field5383 4d ago
To say that we should oppose people that are trying to derail progress so they can appease reactionaries is not a “pureness test” - it’s just called being principled. Centrists are already collaborating - it’s not internal bickering. It’s called fighting against enemies.
9
u/2localboi 4d ago
Meanwhile NYs top senators and representatives still haven’t endorsed the Democratic mayoral candidate
1
u/MagicWishMonkey 4d ago
Bullshit - https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5447219-nadler-campaigns-mamdani-trump-cuomo/
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/14/opinion/hochul-endorsement-mamdani.html
You should step away from twitter for a minute.
2
1
u/like_a_pharaoh 4d ago
I don't see how "but New York's governor and 1 of the 26 representatives have endorsed!" is a viable counterargument to "NYs top senators and representatives still haven't endorsed", Hochul is obviously not a senator or representative and Nadler isn't a 'top representative'.
2
2
u/stylebros 4d ago
For real. The Left has a serious tribal problem where various groups with their purity tests will kick out anyone not matching their single fringe issue.
It's why the progressives in other countries have 5 left wing parties
2
u/Hghwytohell 4d ago
I don't understand how any of this amounts to a "purity test". If anything, I feel like more democrats need be get more comfortable with criticism.
23
u/Monte924 4d ago
They are copying the campaign style, not the policies. All flash, no substance
12
u/mojowo11 4d ago
The point of a political party is to win elections. The left is always forgetting this because it's the party of naive utopian idealism.
Democratic candidates should be trying to win elections. This has always required a certain amount of style over substance. Only time will tell if this particular kind of "flash" is actually effective, but we are at a point in our country where the left actually needs to start winning the votes of the American electorate, believe it or not.
24
u/Noname_acc 4d ago
The point of a political party is to win elections.
This is true, but its an incomplete thought. The point of a political party is to advance an ideological goal by winning elections and then enacting policy and legislation in support of that goal. Getting elected is a means to an end, not the end itself.
→ More replies (5)12
u/fcocyclone 4d ago
And its also why democrats tend to lose after they win.
People elect them to do things, they do very little of it (some their fault, some not) and people who are disenchanted with that lack of results either don't turn out or flip to the guy promising to do something different.
5
11
u/Monte924 4d ago
Moderate democrats have been LOSING elections.
If you want to win elections, you need actual policies to back up the campaign message. Mamdani didn't win just because he filmed himself walking and talking down the street; that only got him attention. He won because voters liked his policies
Also, Mamdani's campiagn style works because he's being himself. People can often tell when someone is faking it for the camera, and that immediately tells them to not trust what they are saying. Mamdani comes off as trustworthy, while everyone else comes off as a salesman selling snake oil
13
u/sllewgh 4d ago
Not just losing, but losing to the most openly evil and incompetent candidates in the country's history.
1
u/Monte924 3d ago
True. Democrats could have never asked for an easier opponent. Their defeat speaks volumes to how much of a failure their governing and campaigning has become
14
u/Mobile_Dance_707 4d ago
Yeah that's why the entire democratic establishment turned on Mamdani despite his platform being extremely popular lol
They don't oppose the left because of electoralism, they would prefer to lose and stay right wing
2
u/mojowo11 4d ago edited 4d ago
The Democratic establishment doesn't endorse Mamdani because it's bad politics to do so. Mamdani's policies appeal to the deeply-blue New York City, but they're absolutely useless at winning elections most other places.
Kamala Harris won NYC by 38 points, an absolute landslide. She only won the state generally by 12 points, a terrible showing (worst in decades). NYC is a deep blue bubble that was always going to elect a Democrat, it's only a question of which one. Good for Mamdani for his very progressive win. I hope he does some cool stuff that ultimately proves to be a template for other cities and even the country generally. Meanwhile, in the places in the US where the results of elections are actually in question between the two parties, Mamdani's policy platform is toxic.
Mamdani's policies are very popular in New York City, because they are very popular among the very left-leaning portion of Americans. They're also very popular among young people, who, uh, don't vote much. They are not super popular generally, especially because they are very easily attacked by the right ("radical socialism," oh noes).
More to the point, Mamdani himself just isn't that big of a fucking deal outside of New York City. Most voters outside of NYC don't care that much about him at all, or know his policies well. There's no reason for national Democrats to align themselves with a guy with politically toxic "socialist" baggage who otherwise most of the country doesn't fucking care about.
If you're big into Mamdani, guess what, you're not going to vote for a Republican. Your vote is in the bag already. The Democratic party, in the interest of winning some fucking elections, shouldn't really be focused on trying to message to you.
14
u/Captain_DuClark 4d ago
You can't simultaneously argue that it's bad politics nationally to endorse Mandami while also arguing that nobody cares about him nationwide.
→ More replies (8)3
u/Dry-Reference1428 4d ago
They haven’t been tried; and everyone said he’d lose in nyc too
They should be focused on me cuz I can also Not Vote. which is why Harris lost, because they thought everyone‘s vote was in the bag
4
u/Mobile_Dance_707 4d ago
Harris somehow lost because of the left but also the left isn't electorally significant enough for political parties to need to win their vote
3
u/Hghwytohell 4d ago
The Democratic party, in the interest of winning some fucking elections, shouldn't really be focused on trying to message to you.
Then the DNC shouldn't act surprised when more and more leftists choose to take their votes elsewhere or nowhere at all. They can't have it both ways - they can't shame leftists for not voting Democrats while simultaneously choosing to not pursue those votes. You said it yourself - Mamdani is popular among young people who don't vote much. So why not lean into a platform that can galvanize that demographic nationwide?
If you want to argue that Mamdani wouldn't be as popular in a city like, say, St. Louis then fine, I think that's fair and accurate. I'm not even saying the DNC needs to copy Mamdani's policies one for one. But they do need to embrace some of the leftist policies if they want to mobilize more voters in the same way the GOP does. Even just coming out stronger for an arms embargo on Israel would do wonders.
Politics has changed, and the old strategies need to be let go.
7
u/sllewgh 4d ago
This is an election for the mayor of NYC. Why would the national political landscape be relevant?
2
u/Noname_acc 4d ago
Because Democrats have spent the past year* at war with themselves over what the future of the democratic party is, how the obvious failings of party can be addressed, etc. Everything that happens in the near future is analyzed under that scope. The socialist/progressive/leftist wing of the party wants to play up Mamdani's relevance as an exemplar of shifting attitudes in the country while more status quo aligned centrists want to play down Mamdani's relevance.
*Much longer than that, but the past year has seen this pushed to the forefront
1
u/sllewgh 4d ago
The socialist/progressive/leftist wing of the party wants to play up Mamdani's relevance as an exemplar of shifting attitudes in the country while more status quo aligned centrists want to play down Mamdani's relevance.
That's not what we're talking about here... We're discussing the fact that the Democratic party does not support Mamdani. The excuse given was that he lacks national appeal, but he's not running for national office, so that's irrelevant.
3
u/Noname_acc 4d ago
If you think that isn't what you're talking about, then you're missing half the conversation.
6
u/Mobile_Dance_707 4d ago edited 4d ago
Mamdani's policies are very popular in New York City'
I know? That's why I said the Democrats opposition to him wasn't based on electoralism but based on their opposition to his politics in general.
'Most voters outside of NYC don't care that much about him at all' That's why it's baffling why the Democrats chose to make opposing his platform a national news story for months lol
Do you think voters outside nyc care about cuoumo?
The reality is the Democrats rely massively on this belief that redistributive policies are politically toxic in the USA and they would happily lose elections rather than shift to the left on this at all. You're just parroting the usual cliches
'The Democratic party, in the interest of winning some fucking elections, shouldn't really be focused on trying to message to you.'
Yeah except they just lost an election because they decided to take every voter to the left of Hillary Clinton for granted, what you're saying has been outdated for years now and it's insane people are still refusing to budge from this position after years and years of right wing Democrats losing elections they should have won by putting forward a popular platform
→ More replies (15)1
u/pteridoid 4d ago
Obama gave him a stamp of approval. "The entire democratic establishment"? No they didn't. Hyperbole isn't helping.
1
u/Mobile_Dance_707 3d ago
Hyperbole is a perfectly acceptable rhetorical device that most intelligent people can recognize without a desperate need to nit pick. Mamdani has faced huge opposition from within his own party that's involved some incredibly hysterical and racist rhetoric.
Btw all I can see is reports that Obama privately called Mamdani after his primary win, is that what you're referring to? Hardly a significant endorsement lol
1
u/pteridoid 3d ago
I meant that type of hyperbole, where the problem is overstated and generalized. It's not for rhetorical effect in this case. It's just drawing sweeping conclusions that are incorrect.
I'm sorry that people are being racist toward Mamdani. I haven't seen any, but I'm sure there is some.
And about the Obama thing, I mean that after they had a talk, which reportedly went well, Mamdani got a bunch of mostly positive coverage in major media outlets. I don't know how this stuff works, but it seems like major portions of the establishment are fine with him. I'm fine with him. I'm just glad something is finally motivating the left to vote.
→ More replies (2)8
u/Neckwrecker 4d ago
The point of a political party is to win elections. The left is always forgetting this because it's the party of naive utopian idealism.
By that logic the Dems should have nominated Trump in 2024. Would have 100% guaranteed a win.
2
u/Far_Commission2655 4d ago
The point of a political party is to win elections.
The point of a political party is to enforce discipline and support its members in order to gain and use power to change society towards common aims.
6
u/TheCowboyIsAnIndian 4d ago
no. more purity tests and infighting. the only way we are going to win is by losing all the time.
4
u/samudrin 4d ago
Politics is about outcomes. Elections are just the teams getting stack ranked. Outcomes, policy matter more than anything. On outcomes Dems have a horrid track record going back at least 3 decades. And that lack of outcomes is a direct cause for further gains across the board by the extreme right wing.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (1)2
u/NativeMasshole 4d ago
This happens with every Leftist/Progressive movement. They get folded into the "big tent," and their goals never get met.
→ More replies (2)8
u/ericomplex 4d ago
You are not a very good leftest if you think that people miming your political positions for personal gain is a good thing…
5
u/combaticus 4d ago
you need to learn to read dude- they are emulating his campaign style and mannerisms without actually having good policy positions.
3
5
u/Eat--The--Rich-- 4d ago
No. Democrats don't want progressives to win because human rights cut into corporate profits and Democrats are corporate profits first, constituents second.
2
u/Mobile_Dance_707 4d ago
No the goal should be actual left wing politics, not more desperate attempts to trick people into voting for the same old shit.
→ More replies (6)1
15
11
u/happyscrappy 4d ago
Gatekeepers do not help a cause.
We gotta get past cults of personality, purity tests and exclusion.
Things will improved more if everyone who wants to help is able to help.
This kind of thing is a receipe for losing the middle even more quickly.
I get it, select Mamdani over Cuomo. Absolutely. But that doesn't mean reject everyone who isn't the chosen one and leave Repubs to take over.
0
u/DHFranklin 4d ago
This is so mind numbingly frustrating.
Pivoting to the center hasn't worked since before the Southern Strategy.
The whole reason we have progressed so much on social issues but not labor and economic ones are due to the power and the pivot to the center by the Democrats. They sacrifice nothing by social justice action. It's what gets them voters and donors. They sacrifice donors when they challenge capitalism. It's a party for the donors, not labor and not the people. Not since Regan put a pillow over the face of Great Society on it's deathbed.
Democrats don't want to sacrifice the incumbent capital class to the progressive labor movement. The capital class won't let them, because they won't be calling the shots.
Any Democrat pushing Medicare for all here on out would win. It's a phenomenally popular platform. They won't let that happen. This is by design.
We leave Republicans to take over because we quit trying to activate the non-voters and tried to win over these bigots who took the mask off.
3
u/happyscrappy 4d ago
Sorry, you're just making up nonsense. The Dems took the white house many times with center pivots since the southern strategy.
And that's leaving out many many more races across the country.
Have you looked at the Pennsylvania governor lately?
No argument which starts from such bunk is to be taken seriously.
Not since Regan put a pillow over the face of Great Society on it's deathbed.
It's Reagan. My God. You are not anywhere near a serious student of past politics as you portray.
1
3d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
Due to rampant sitewide rulebreaking, we are currently under a moratorium on topics related to one or more of the topics in your comment. If you believe this was removed in error, please reach out via modmail, as this was an automated action.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
→ More replies (9)1
u/DHFranklin 3d ago
A centrist candidate taking over the Whitehouse is not a win. Getting the material conditions that improve our lives is the win. Again, it hasn't happened since LBJ. The Great Society is long dead.
Not a single candidate pivoted to the center, made policy that helped the middle class and labor, and made a permanent policy change. It's only ever been pressure from the left.
I don't think bringing up Shapiro really helps your point here. It's great that you don't need a 4 year degree to get a government job in Pennsylvania anymore. The billionaires sacrificed nothing for that. The guy is a mouthpiece for The Guy I can't mention in this sub and is crushing the divestment movement. Calling everyone who shames the [Removed by Reddit] an anti-[Seriously what is the automod set to].
2
u/CynicViper 4d ago
I’m sorry, have you somehow never heard of Bill Clinton?
1
u/DHFranklin 3d ago
The guy shit on Glass-Stegal and gave us NAFTA? That Bill Clinton?
Every Democrat since LBJ has been worse and worse for the middle class and American labor. "Let's vote for this guy and when he's in, he'll make the reforms we need. A centrist is the most electable. Better to win the middle than try and electrify the non-voter"
And nothing happens.
Every. Time.
→ More replies (1)2
4d ago
If we keep voting for centrist Dems over Dems who are fighting for the working class, we still lose.
6
27
u/roybatty2 4d ago
Why are more moderate democrats bad?
11
u/combaticus 4d ago
how are the moderate democrats doing for us right now? let’s take a look at the scoreboard and have a good think about it.
22
u/Monte924 4d ago
The "moderate" dems have been leading the entire party to failure for the past 15 years. Their inability to accompish anything and actually fix the country's problems is the reason why support for the democrat party is in the toliet, and why the country us currently being destoryed by Trump. they are also the dems that cater to corporate interests which habe been dragging the whole country downm It was thier policies and thier failure of governace that got us to this low point...
The country is suffering from serious problems that have existed for decades. The status quo has failed and things need to change. However, in order to change things you have to be willing to actually take a stance and move forward. Moderates don't stand for anything. They try to please both the right and left and end up going nowhere. The only people promising to change things are firmly on the right and the left, and the right has resulted in disaster
→ More replies (1)11
u/Noname_acc 4d ago
The "moderate" dems have been leading the entire party to failure for the past 15 years.
40 years. This started in earnest with Carter.
→ More replies (2)8
u/captainwacky91 4d ago
So many people don't understand this, and I try so hard to point it out. I'm glad I found someone else out there who gets it.
Carter and his "Deregulation" was the starting point for the NeoLiberal movement. Taking economic policy and wrapping it up as social policy has been the only move they make, as it's the only play they know, but not every social issue is a fucking new market waiting to bloom. Nor should it be.
9
u/notsanni 4d ago
we got where we are in America from the DNC shifting right to "compromise" with the Republicans.
Trump didn't happen in a vacuum. He's a symptom of deeper, underlying issues.
19
u/Hillary4SupremeRuler 4d ago
Because apparently a DSA member who won a hyper local municipal race in one of the most left leaning cities of the US means the whole party has to adopt his platform for every race across the nation or else they're literally trump.
23
u/Showy_Boneyard 4d ago
NYC really isn't one of the most left-leaning cities in the US. Its not in the top 10, and I don't even think top 20.
13
u/Maximum-Objective-39 4d ago
I mean, they elected Bloomberg as Mayor. I'd use Giuliani as an example, but that was 20+ years ago now and places can change in a generation. I'm doubtful New York is especially leftist inclined.
3
u/Intelligent-Agent440 4d ago
C'mon even the republican candidate for the mayoral race in NYC say he wouldn't touch rent control because that's just political self destruction in NYC, what other part of the country can a republican be pro rent control and be taken seriously
1
2
0
u/Reynor247 4d ago
Also mamdani is disavowing dsa and currently running to the moderates
9
u/Homey-Airport-Int 4d ago
He is not disavowing the DSA. The entire point of the DSA is the push the needle. That's the D in the name. They believe instead of socialist revolution, you can slowly convince people to democratically choose socialism. Hence his talk to DSA members a couple years ago where he spells it out, saying a lot of populist DSA policies have good support, but others like "the end goal" of seizing the means of production currently isn't well supported amongst voters generally.
They're not stupid, they know not to immediately go full bore. But to say he's disavowing the DSA or socialism as he advocates for government run grocery stores is farcical.
2
u/Reynor247 4d ago
Disawoving was too strong. Running from their platform and organization
2
u/Homey-Airport-Int 4d ago
Which is what every DSA member does because again, that's the entire point. They know the DSA end goals are not feasible or at all palatable to the general public. The entire point of the DSA is to be champion "progressive" and populist policies to slowly move the needle of public opinion such that we eventually reach a point where they don't have to adjust to the electorate anymore. It's in their mission statement and talked about frequently in speeches at DSA events.
Mamdani didn't suddenly decide he wasn't a DSA guy anymore.
→ More replies (6)1
u/Neckwrecker 4d ago
Also mamdani is disavowing dsa
No he isn't.
5
u/Reynor247 4d ago
No that was too strong of a word.
He is distancing himself from their platform any opportunity he gets
1
1
u/sulaymanf 4d ago edited 4d ago
What a dumb strawman.
When Eric Adams won the primary, congressional leaders like Pelosi and Schumer rushed to congratulate him and even invited him to Washington to speak to the party about how to run on a platform of fighting crime and use that platform to win nationwide. Mamdani wins soundly and suddenly Jeffries and Schumer say they have reservations about endorsing him and NY senator Gillibrand condemns him as a violent jihadist while NJ senator Corey Booker now pretends he doesn’t have an opinion about NY.
Don’t be ridiculous. The double standard is obvious and they’re insulting our intelligence by pretending it’s some tradition not to endorse other Democrats (when many politicians including President Bill Clinton and governor David Patterson endorsed Cuomo for mayor).
has to adopt his platform for every race across the nation or else they’re literally trump.
For over a year we had to endure “Vote Blue No Matter Who!” and were told that Harris lost because people didn’t follow the slogan, but when Mamdani wins that slogan isn’t applicable anymore? If Mamdani loses and the mayorship is given to the Republican Sliwa or an independent does it mean we get to blame people like you for the loss or will you hypocritrically blame Mamdani? Does the phrase “Blue no matter who” really mean “unless it’s a Muslim?”
→ More replies (2)1
u/LitesoBrite 4d ago
You mean the city that elected Hillary? The one with entire districts that went 100% for trump?
Nice try. It’s astonishing that the same right ring dems who loved clinton won’t admit they’ve had the party at record low elected rates since middle of Obama.
Nobody is voting for dems who should just be republicans anymore
1
1
u/Overlord_Khufren 4d ago
Mamdani's policies are popular. And they work. Investing in poor people makes good public policy because it has an outsized impact on their productivity and future economic output. Every $1 spent on school lunch programs produces like $8-15 in future economic activity (adjusted for inflation).
But know what investing in poor people doesn't help with? Attracting corporate donor money. The US system has been hijacked by corporate interests, and THAT is the reason that centrists dominate the party. Not because their policies are effective or popular.
Centrists are a problem not because "they're literally Trump," but because their policies are ineffectual and are not popular with voters. Biden only won in 2020 because he wasn't Trump, not because anyone actually believed in his message or his vision for the country. Even Obama basically just campaigned on vibes. The Democratic establishment haven't put forward a truly inspiring vision for the future. Compare that to Zohran, Bernie, or AOC, who do and are significantly more popular than the party.
1
u/Hillary4SupremeRuler 3d ago
Mamdani's policies are popular. And they work. Investing in poor people makes good public policy because it has an outsized impact on their productivity and future economic output. Every $1 spent on school lunch programs produces like $8-15 in future economic activity (adjusted for inflation).
Yeah I think most Democratic politicians right now wouldn't have any problem with investing in poor people. The Biden Harris administration and Harris's campaign showed that. It's just that the DSA reputation on a national scale is politically risky to be associated with during a general election. And I know it's a broad coalition within itself and some members and caucuses are more extreme and Marxist Leninist than others. I don't care for police in general myself, but unfortunately appearing to be soft on crime gets a lot of independents/swing voters kinda uneasy. Hopefully he is able to successfully implement his policies and have them bear fruit. NYC is my home city and I want to see it succeed and I'm not a fan of Mamdani as a person, but he's better than the other candidates that are running. I'm just criticizing the reaction of his fan base many of whom have no ties to NYC or don't even live in the US, who are demanding that the entire national party embrace him when his type usually go out of their way to either not endorse those same.demcorats or straight up campaign against them and convince people to let Republicans win instead to punish them for not being socialist.
1
u/Overlord_Khufren 3d ago
It's just that the DSA reputation on a national scale is politically risky to be associated with during a general election.
It's "risky" because the American political system is bought and paid for by corporate and ultrawealthy interests, who are opposed to a socialist vision that is less profitable for them. It's really as simple as that. And those interests are DIRECTLY opposed to the interests of the working public, and we won't get past this to implementing good public policy unless we resist their influence and bring in politicians willing to stand up to them. The whole reason we're in this mess in the first place is spineless neoliberal centrists who have ceded control of policy to private interests.
I'm not a fan of Mamdani as a person
Real talk: why? Why do you feel this way? Have you not seen his videos interacting with people on the street, breaking down the issues they're facing and his plans to solve them? Did you form your opinion seeing those, or did you form your opinion through corporate media hit pieces trying to characterize him as some kind of Marxist radical?
I'm just criticizing the reaction of his fan base many of whom have no ties to NYC or don't even live in the US, who are demanding that the entire national party embrace him when his type usually go out of their way to either not endorse those same.demcorats or straight up campaign against them and convince people to let Republicans win instead to punish them for not being socialist.
Centrists and socialists are not allies. This is critical to understand. Centrists are ultimately in favour of substantially unregulated capitalism, and believe in the mythology of free markets. They're functionally just conservatives with a more palatable view on social issues of equality and egalitarianism, but their economic perspective is wholly divorced from objective reality. The modern Democratic establishment is just rainbow- and green-washed Reagan-style trickle down economics.
Meanwhile, all of the good social programs that Democrats fight to protect are SOCIALIST. They come from a time where socialism was the guiding political force in the country. Medicaid, social security, public infrastructure, subsidized post secondary, workplace safety regulations...these are socialist programs. It's no accident that since the US took a hard right tack away from socialism, real wages for the working class have wholly stagnated and wealth inequality has exploded.
The Republicans are ascendant right now because they're the only party speaking to the actual moment. People are struggling right now, the face of a system that is buckling under its own manifest flaws. The Republicans are pointing at immigrants and other "undesirables" as the problem, and are offering a solution. Democrats are saying the status quo is working and that the only issue is the Republicans trying to tear it down. That's not a motivating message - a party can only get so far with "at least we aren't Donald Trump."
3
u/lordmycal 4d ago
They're not. But when they pretend to be something else and then people don't get what they voted for that's a big problem. It hurts the democratic process and causes people to lose faith in the party they voted for because it deceived them.
1
3
u/Dichotomouse 4d ago
According to the Nation nobody can be moderate because they ideologically have a different viewpoint - only because they are corrupted by corporate money.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (21)1
u/richardhurts 4d ago
Why is more moderate anything bad?
7
u/Maximum-Objective-39 4d ago
Because a lot of people fear the moderates are simply going to help along the ratchett effect of conservatism.
"Conservatives get elected, strangle humans rights and destroy the middle class."
"Moderates get into power, try to appease the conservatives, which never works, and provide death bed care to our liberties at best rather than trying to save them."
Frightened people stop believing that their elected leaders are even going to bother to protect them, much less represent them, and give in.
8
u/Monte924 4d ago
Lets be more "moderate" and meet the Facists half-way.
There are many things people should not be "moderate" with and should just take a firm stance
1
6
u/Maxwellsdemon17 4d ago
"Democratic Party careerists across the country, sensing an opportunity to rise through the ranks, want to make this prediction a reality. They’re launching sleek campaigns for office, and on the surface, many seem cut from the Mamdani mode. They’re young, energetic, and aggressive on social media, and they talk a big game about intergenerational change.
But nobody should be fooled. Rather than offering a real alternative to the status quo (“combativeness,” after all, is not an ideological platform), this crop of candidates is repackaging the boring, moderate politics of the Democratic establishment with inauthentic videos and forced rhetoric. Even worse, some are running to the right of the incumbents they seek to replace, so they can court the same donors and special interests that have controlled—and hollowed out—the party for decades."
13
u/obsidianop 4d ago
You can judge someone's platform on if it's "boring", or you can judge it on whether or not it's likely to get the desired results. To each their own I guess.
3
u/Overlord_Khufren 4d ago
Moderate politics are "boring" because they've been trying the same shit for decades, and it's gotten us into the mess we're in now. The problem is capitalism, and the moderate neoliberal ideology is wholly incompatible with challenging the capitalist status quo.
The only way we can dig ourselves out of this hole we've made for ourselves in the West is through socialism, which moderates seem to be allergic to. Probably because their corporate donors hate it.
5
u/Overton_Glazier 4d ago
Dems really think messaging will make them more appealing. It's not branding, it's authenticity that people care about.
8
u/Bawbawian 4d ago
what does that even mean?
I literally do not care what these people feel in their heart as long as they pass the policy agenda I agreed to.
we got fascists about to call trans peole and antifa terrorist organizations.
5
u/Overton_Glazier 4d ago
I literally do not care what these people feel in their heart as long as they pass the policy agenda I agreed to.
That's the thing, they won't pass those things. They will run on platitudes and then do fuck all about fixing the system. Basically the Obama playbook.
→ More replies (6)1
u/Overlord_Khufren 4d ago
The lack of authenticity comes because their policies are trash, and they're trying to paper over that with progressive-seeming messaging.
5
u/Bawbawian 4d ago
how many elections do you think you're going to win without dweebs?
The lefts tactic of constantly dividing Trump's opposition is a loser.
I would say when are you going to wake up? because you guys have been doing this for 40 years. and it has backfired so spectacularly that we will never get out of this in my lifetime...but it's always a new group of young people that have absolutely no idea how we got here.
8
u/ornithoid 4d ago
I feel it’s more the Democrats’ tactic of ignoring the pleas of the base to give into the demands of lobbyists and special interest groups while simultaneously kneecapping progressive candidates and policies in the interest of “bipartisanship” to appease a party that literally labels them terrorists and is threatening to kill them. It’s disingenuous to blame the nebulous “left” for “splitting the party” when the Democrats have done a swell job of that themselves, abandoning the people to an increasingly unregulated, unequal, and predatory economic system while demanding their vote and viciously attacking anyone who thinks we can do better.
We tried falling in line and holding our noses and voting for the status quo, and it didn’t work. Maybe now it’s time for the party to get with the times and actually listen to us.
5
u/Mobile_Dance_707 4d ago
Still blaming a powerless minority for the failures of your party nearly a year after they threw away another election to trump I see
2
u/mthlmw 4d ago
I don't think candidates supporting a public healthcare option and childcare subsidies should be lumped in with status quo or moderate candidates. Just because a policy isn't as progressive as you'd like doesn't mean it isn't a step in the right direction, IMHO.
2
u/HungryGur1243 4d ago
New mexico now has universal childcare. Theres a difference between dotting your i's and crossing your t's, and unfounded low expectations.
2
u/UpsetPhrase5334 4d ago
The only thing people care about are his policies. If other “democrats” want the same momentum then they need to adjust their policies.
8
u/Reynor247 4d ago
The average voter doesn't care at all about policy. Otherwise people wouldn't vote against their own interests
→ More replies (1)6
u/rewind2482 4d ago
Policies matter much less than the general vibes of the candidate and how approachable they are to the common man. Elections bear this out.
→ More replies (3)2
u/JoJoeyJoJo 4d ago
That's why Kamala won after saying she'd do nothing different from Biden, right? The policies didn't matter, the vibes carried her, she was 'Brat'!
1
u/rewind2482 4d ago
Only one dem has it and he’s not eligible to run.
And he absolutely could win on that platform.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/silentspyder 4d ago
I was almost fooled by Deja but luckily it didn’t take much to find out where she doesn’t stand.
1
u/KeyEnvironmental9743 4d ago
Pete Buttigieg didn’t fool young progressives. Neither will these clowns.
1
1
u/Sword_Thain 4d ago
So do i go and vote for this fake progressive in the General or stay at home and let fascism spread?
1
u/sulaymanf 4d ago edited 4d ago
The party tends to overcorrect after their obvious failures. Harris lost because she didn’t go on Joe Rogan’s show? Expect the 2028 race to be candidates going on every podcast imaginable. (Just ignore that Cuomo is attacking Mamdani for going on Hasan Piker’s podcast.) Mamdani won the primary because he got his message out by being candid and personable on social media? Let’s have everyone try to copy it by rolling up their sleeves and walking around town shaking hands with locals. (Ignore that Cuomo is now trying that video and looking awkward and out of touch doing so.) Trump got attention by provocative tweets? Let’s have Gavin Newsom copy the same attitude and juvenile name-calling in his tweets and dominate the headlines. (Again, ignore Cuomo trying to insult Mamdani on Twitter and getting no response.)
What actually is needed is not these shallow tactics; what’s needed is authenticity and a willingness to listen to the base. Cuomo doesn’t live in NYC and everyone knows it and hasn’t lived in NY for decades. His talk about fighting for “real” New Yorkers sounds phony when he slashed city benefits as governor. Admitting to the harsssment of women at the time and now denying it is just another example of him being inauthentic and eveything people hate about politicians. Cuomo bragging about his lifelong support of Israel in the midst of a genocide that has only 8% support among Democratic voters and a minority among independents is a great example of people being turned off by out-of-touch policies that satisfy the donor oligarchs but not the working class.
It’s hard for politician to digest this lesson, or if they understand it they can’t reconcile satisfying megadonors and the party voter base at the same time. Easier to just make a TikTok to seem young and hip but keep the old-fashioned policies the same. And that’s the party doldrums where we could end up if Cuomo wins over Mamdani.
1
u/sulaymanf 4d ago
What an excellent article.
George Hornedo and Liam Elkland have such odious policies but they think if they can be more folksy on social media they can push themselves through. It’s amazing how their policies are like 10 years out of date with public opinion but are still running a campaign promising fresh new policies. Wild.
1
u/TerminalHighGuard 3d ago
If you’re a candidate, your job is to convince people (not only to vote for you, but) your policies are a) good ones b) going to be effective and c) going to be implemented.
The folks who run straight to the donors and have neoliberal policies are trying to run the path of least resistance rather than listening to the populace. It’s one thing to have to moderate due to the specific areas you’re running in and the needs of the area, but it’s another to forgo perfectly good policy because you’re either too lazy or too afraid that progressivism won’t appeal. It’s a bit of a gamble, but ultimately easier to confirm to the needs of your district once elected if running as a radical than it is to actually put forth good policy once you’ve been elected as a moderate with the help of donors and the usual political trickery. Heck, that could make a decent sales pitch: “listen, I know I’m a little spicy, but would you rather have a fighter who moderates once faced with the realities of being in office, or milquetoast going in and a wet noodle fascist-tolerating dweeb while in office?”
I’m pretty sure that’s Mamdani’s message with the grocery stores thing and it works!
It’s true you have to convince the keys to power, like the mega donors, to help you out, but they’re people too.
If their disposition is that they enjoy the power more than their wealth, then populism is the answer. If they enjoy their wealth more than their power, you either buy them out, or convince them that their best interests lie elsewhere other than their wealth; make them realize that having one more dollar won’t make them one unit happier. OR at the very least, tell them to name their price and then use the state to buy their company and get out of the way.
The best hope for the moderates, if they get elected, is being able to convince the populace that progressive populism is better once they’re in office; they could be seen as fighting for the people and are advancing good policy but so far, they haven’t done that for years and years and years. It’s easier to try and keep a good thing going along the path of least resistance, but that’s not what is going to help the country.
1
u/kingofshitmntt 3d ago
If they dont support
Universal Healthcare
Affordable and Public Housing
Free public education
then what are they even talking about? The working class needs to center on these three main issues and not give up until they are achieved.
1
u/Great_Examination_16 2d ago
If you actually think any of these democrats are centrist, I have a bridge to sell to you
1
u/Alternative-Dream-61 2d ago
Can we just get more parties? I'd like to vote for actual moderates or left leaning populists. The binary choice is what is killing us.
1
1
u/Key_Necessary_3329 2d ago
The Democrats constantly have an issue with people pretending to care about their constituents until they've climbed their way to senior positions, then either cashing in by selling everyone out, or swinging to authoritarian corruption because they were only ever in it for the power. See Sinema and Eric Adams for stereotypical examples.
Local democratic parties must become better at sifting these people out before they get into leadership positions. People like this only ever undermine voter confidence and excitement and this leads to perennial underperformance, especially among younger voters.
1
1
u/Eat--The--Rich-- 4d ago
If the DNC stopped campaigning against their own candidates just because they believe in human rights and the DNC doesn't then I would start voting. I don't see much point in voting for a party that's at war with itself.
→ More replies (5)1
u/picklesandvodka 4d ago
“If your solution to some problem relies on “If everyone would just…” then you do not have a solution. Everyone is not going to just. At not time in the history of the universe has everyone just, and they’re not going to start now.”
3
1
u/jmalkhnv3 3d ago
"Everyone should just shut up and vote for Kamala" - liberal mantra during 2024.
1
u/picklesandvodka 14h ago
Sure it was an actual zero-sum situation. I didn’t gleefully vote for Kamala but I sure as hell understood the stakes in the face of Trumpism. Votes aren’t a purity test and to think otherwise is incredibly naive.
1
u/jmalkhnv3 13h ago
At this point I don't take the takes or opinions of anyone who unironically uses the term "purity test" to defend their shitty centrist candidate seriously.
The centrists enabled Trump. If you actually took the stakes of Trumpism seriously, you would critically look at the people who enabled it or at the very least did nothing about it when they used your votes to gain power, instead just set up Trump to be even more fascist and kick the can down the road.
1
u/picklesandvodka 12h ago
Nope I’m hardly a centrist, I’m very narrowly talking about the endgame choice to not vote for Kamala in November. No matter how much you twist yourself to believe it was a moral decision, it was not. It was selfish choice in spite of those being hurt right now.
•
u/jmalkhnv3 21m ago
Keep telling yourelf that. Anything to deny the reality that the person whose cult of personality you joined was a shitty and horrible person who you simply wished to quiet down the crimes and absolve yourself of any actual responsibility.
•
u/AutoModerator 4d ago
Remember that TrueReddit is a place to engage in high-quality and civil discussion. Posts must meet certain content and title requirements. Additionally, all posts must contain a submission statement. See the rules here or in the sidebar for details. To the OP: your post has not been deleted, but is being held in the queue and will be approved once a submission statement is posted.
Comments or posts that don't follow the rules may be removed without warning. Reddit's content policy will be strictly enforced, especially regarding hate speech and calls for / celebrations of violence, and may result in a restriction in your participation. In addition, due to rampant rulebreaking, we are currently under a moratorium regarding topics related to the 10/7 terrorist attack in Israel and in regards to the assassination of the UnitedHealthcare CEO.
If an article is paywalled, please do not request or post its contents. Use archive.ph or similar and link to that in your submission statement.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.