argue amongst themselves instead of realizing the bigger picture which is to win power and do good things with it

Almost as if people have contradicting ideas about what ‘good things’ need doing.

But you understand “donors” are just rich fucks

Lmao, idk I don’t really think there’s anything “just” about being a billionare political donor

Until the NYC/NY Democrat party says “don’t vote for him” then it’s really irrelevant

Unrelated - I have a bridge to sell you

Ok now go look at what the donors are saying.

Mamdani has the majority opinion, that Israel has a right to exist as a state with equal rights. Zionists have a hard time accepting that as an answer but it’s a morally unobjectionable one.

They’re not mad because they lost money, they’re terrified because Mamdani is a socialist.

Not in the article, but it’s not really a secret

Bill Ackman (billionare democratic donor) has offered essentially unlimited funding for anyone to run against him as a write in candidate

It’s indicative of a deep, irreversible rift in the party. Either democrats adapt or they split in half.

Either they listen to their voters and become a ‘new’ democratic party, or they’ll continue bleeding numbers and die. Either way, it’s still the beginning of the end.

They are going to gamble that they can stay the same because people are/will be so mad about… well everything.

They will 100% try to do this, but they’ll end up losing and then blame the voters they’re maligning. Mamdani is a case-in-point difference between status quo candidate turnouts and progressive candidate turnout. The 7% delta over Cuomo is the 7% they’ll lose if they try it again.

If Cuomo runs independent, the democratic party loses any hope of keeping their progressive base and it might actually split entirely.

After bullying their base for the last 10 years to get in line behind their shit moderate candidates, if they were to suddenly decide that primaries don’t mean anything then they’d never be able to convince progressives to vote against their interests again.

Cuomo is backed by the democratic establishment and the DNC’s donor class. It doesnt matter if he’s independent, he’s the establishment pick and would be running with their funding.

“Vote blue no matter who”

Mamdani wins historic primary victory

“…shit”

Would have been expedient doing that back in February when polls were showing him at 1% and nobody knew who he was

Say whatever you want about him, that man has the best comedic timing

Whoever drew this went to great lengths to keep Israel on the map

I see two outcomes:

• Congress introduces articles
• Impeached, but fails ratification in senate

or

• Congress introduces articles
• Some terrible tragedy befalls us or Israel
• Articles fail and congress backs the war full-throated

There is no version of this that ends in removal, and even impeachment wouldn’t be anything more than performative outrage.

The majority of sitting representatives have been waiting for an acceptable excuse to bomb Iran for decades. The only objection any of them have is doing so without manufacturing consent from voters first, but we’ve already seen how this plays out with Afghanistan. They’ll drum up dubious evidence of WMD’s and launch their entry, and then spend 20 years trying to ‘get out’ while securing Iran’s material resources on the way.

The only difference this time is that Iran has almost 5x the population and 100x the GDP of Afghanistan in 2001, plus an actual organized military base with proper advanced weapons manufacturing. There’s a reason we’ve waited this long to actually do this, and it isn’t because we were busy doing other things. It’s because this isn’t a war we can win without pulling everyone else into it (or at the very least without isolating them from global trading partners).

It’s not a morbid joke to call this a WWIII softlaunch.

Just cut that gangrenous appendage of a state off from the handle and send it into the fucking sea

If nothing else our HepC and illiteracy rates would be improved

Seriously though, bombing Iran has been a multi-generaltional bi-partisan wet dream since the bombs stopped dropping in WWII. Nobody is impeaching him for this - like two weeks ago Schumer was goading him for ‘being weak’ for negotiating with ‘the terrorist nation of Iran’. There might be 5 people in total in congress who oppose a war with Iran.

They can also remain in Palestine and live alongside native Palestinians or return to their home countries under the right of return.

The point is that ethnic jews would no longer have the exclusive right of self-determination in Palestine.

Just a helpful reminder that class relations are real, and that most legacy news outlets have a shared class-interest in de-emphasizing class and income as important electoral issues.

There’s a really good reason why democrats will seemingly do just about anything to avoid platforming socialist policies - and it isn’t because they aren’t popular. They see them as an existential threat to their party, because not only would they lose their primary funding sources if they were to stop protecting donors from wealth re-distributive policies, but they’d also lose their network of private sector allies that enable them to govern at all.

Once you understand the scope of the problem, it’s really hard to see the two party system as anything other than good-cop bad-cop neoliberal theater.

Which looks worse? A country blatantly attacking its own citizens flying its own flag? Or a country attacking illegal immigrants flying a flag of a foreign country we’ve kinda’ had a war with in the past?

My point is that the protestors are there specifically to protest against the forced deportation of legally present non residents under racist, jingoist pretexts. Those people aren’t illegal, but they’re being deported because of their foreign status (particularly mexican and hispanic foreign nations). Flying the mexican flag (especially next to american national symbols) is meant to assert their right to be here, and that the community of LA stands with them for their right.

You’re suggesting that they instead waive american flags so that it looks like trump is abusing US citizens with the National Guard, when the whole point of the protest was to resist the forceful deportation of immigrants. If they were to ‘make it look like they’re US citizens’ then that would defeat the purpose of that demonstration.

Liberals (idgaf if that’s you or not) want to make this about Trump’s militarized crackdown on protests because that’s what materially affects them, ignoring the reason we’re in the streets protesting in the first place.

Please, PLEASE stop being a reactionary and understand how messaging and subtext works.

lmao, that’s not what reactionary means. Just fuck off already.

I don’t even know who or what issue you’re specifically referring to, but it doesn’t mean anything to moralize about the issues voters are responding to. It doesn’t even really matter what specific issue that does it - if voters lose faith in democracy serving their interests, they just aren’t going to bother working within that system. They’ll either become completely apathetic or become radicalized against it.

This is what a failure of democracy looks like - not a military coup or an armed rebellion, but a slow, gangrenous rotting of trust in democratic institutions.