Spyke
politics·politics byMicroWave

Top Democrat seems sour after Mamdani-backed candidates oust House incumbents

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) says New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is going to have to smooth things over with congressional Democrats after backing several progressive candidates who ousted incumbents during Tuesday’s primary elections.

Asked if Mamdani’s endorsements were making him “enemies” with Democrats in Washington, D.C., Jeffries told CNN that he and Mamdani “strongly” disagreed over his primary picks ahead of Election Day.

Now, according to Jeffries, the mayor has serious “work to do in terms of the conversations that he’s going to have with members of Congress moving forward.”

Top Democrat seems sour after Mamdani-backed candidates oust House incumbentshttps://www.huffpost.com/entry/hakeem-jeffries-reacts-zohran-mamdani-endorsed-candidates-ousting-democrat-incumbents_n_6a3c0ca4e4b0488a51b2f237Open linkView original on lemmy.world

Now, according to Jeffries, the mayor has serious “work to do in terms of the conversations that he’s going to have with members of Congress moving forward.”

More like establishment Dems are scared they'll finally have to do work at all. Why don't you write a strongly worded letter to Mamdani? Or is that too harsh an action given that's the same level of opposition you've had against Trump?

43

Jeffries and Booker are whores. AIPAC owned whores who would 100% pull a Clarence Thomas for enough money.

21
lemmy.world

The idiot centrists should be the ones patching things up over their epicly failed leadership, lack of a platform for their voters, and genocide support.

13
grrgylereply
slrpnk.net

Funny how centrists don't appear to be jumping at the chance to find "common ground" with actual progressive politicians.

15
lemmy.world

Mr Jeffries,

I am appalled that you, or any Democrats, think that you get to pick who it is that we, the people, vote for. You are a representative for us. You need to smooth things over with the American people because these others were voted in not because Mamdani is a cult of personality, but because they are doing and saying things the people like and want.

When you and the party can do something successfully, such as codify LGBTQ rights (I.e., gay marriage, trans rights, etc), eliminate corporate government influence, ensure proper health care, and a laundry list of other things then maybe we can take you and your “preferred choices” seriously. Until then, watch change happen from the people that actually have to be in the trenches dealing with all of the American government’s fuckery. Please sit down, kindly shut up, and do your job of representing the people’s needs and not presenting your next potential colleague.

Sincerely,

An American Voter in Illinois

65
WindyRebelreply
lemmy.world

I am so tempted to send this as an actual email to his team along with a link to the attached article.

3

I hope you do. And I would like to see the form letter that you receive in response.

2

How long did Jeffries wait to endorse Mamdani as the NYC mayoral candidate?

Maybe it stings that Mamdani's successes so far have come despite support from Democrat leadership. Just shows what taking your job as a public servant seriously can do.

30
lemmy.world

Ah yes the house Democrats known for their fervor, backbone and hard fought results.

You can't even threaten an enemy properly and you are gonna threaten a fellow Democrat? Fuckin traitors. And they would be dealt with accordingly.

44

It makes more sense when you realize they're just the paid opposition party all these years. It explains all the ratchet effects and lack of real social progress.

11
lemmy.world

I think it's probably more complicated than that, like sure lots of people in the party end up as paid opposition and certainly the longer they are in Washington making the kinds of compromises they have to make to get anything done the better they get at rationalizing those decisions. But I wholly agree that things need to change from what they are

6

It's not at all complicated. R&D vote in lockstep for corporate issues. They only differ on policies that affect living voters.

2

If Jeffries is annoyed with you, you probably did something right. If your incumbents are just there to tow the party line, kiss corporate ass, kiss Netanyahu's ass, and give, at most, flaccid resistance to the Republican agenda before bending to their will, they deserve to lose their seats. The few progressives we have need more numbers. I'll happily sacrifice a few milquetoast party dems for progressives with a backbone and an agenda for change.

19
piefed.blahaj.zone

no the incumbent dems should be scared, very scared. he just showed the rest of the country how to take them down. It's time to get to work.

13
chiliedoggreply
lemmy.world

There are 2 parts to taking back the government. The GOP has to be stopped, so voting Dem is a necessity. We have a 2-party system, so anyone who isn't voting blue is contributing to the problem.

"But the Dems aren't what we want them to be"

That's what primaries are for, and Mandami is the perfect case study. Primaries are where the most important elections are determined.

That being said, I live in an area of Texas where Dems simoly aren't going to win, so I'm actually a registered Republican most years. I vote the in the Republican primaries for the least-crazy among them, but then vote blue in the general election.

11
P1k1ereply
lemmy.world

Very tactical of you, tho that's a hell of an uphill battle

4

I'm in a deep-enough red area that I simply have to deal with Republicans. And most of them are perfectly nice people until the Fox News switch gets flipped in their heads.

It's crazy. There will be a bunch of perfectly nice ladies gathering supplies for the food bank and blankets for the poor, and then something switches and they'll start talking about how the Demoncrats want to steal the election so they can use tax money to pay to have illegals get hormone blockers so they can rape Christian girls.

1
lemmy.world

The DNC is scared. They see what happened to the old guard Republicans (centrist) they started losing to more right leaning candidates. Now those leaders are gone and we have a crazy right leaning "leadership" in power. The DNC doesn't want that to happen to them as well. Yet, I think it's inevitable, we've swung too far right and there is too much pent up anger for the centrist to keep power.

11
lemmy.world

They aren't centrists though. They aren't anything really. They are all bought and paid for by Israel.

Why do we send them billions every month? Because it reaches them, they skim off the top, and put much it directly in the pockets of congress. How else do they leave office rich? It's a giant money laundering scheme at our expense.

14

yep. If they lose their primaries they lose their cash cow which is why they are scared and you can see it the way the lash out at progressive candidates. They know their fucked if there is a competent opponent.

1
lemmy.world

mamdani endorsed zionist and zionist won, who cares

-4

TIL anyone who doesn't outright call for the extermination of jews is a zionist.

2

Here's hoping the endorsements keep coming and House corpo losers will have to "smooth things over" with Mamdani. Fuck Jeffries.

15
lemmy.world

So now both Democrats and Republicans are going to use facebook's and Instagram and content creators to highlight and spread content about how bad Mamdani is doing. Which they have ease of access now since the political left removed themselves from all digital conservations and spaces that are not 100% left.

0
webadictreply
lemmy.world

Which spaces are you talking about that the political left has removed themselves from?

1

Maybe it's Jeffries who has some serious work to do in terms of the conversations that he's going to have with American voters moving forwards.

29
lemmy.world

Oh where's that big tent at guys?

Well, its right here in my pants after seeing those awesome primary results.

30
retrofed.com

I just wrote letters to both Jeffries and Schumer telling both of them to throw their full support behind the candidates who won or resign

45

Most likely, it won't do much; a drop in a bucket.

But enough drops can fill a bucket, and enough letters can at least bog down their mail handlers, send a message and hopefully get on their nerves.

9
lemmy.world

Jefferies should shut the fuck. Fall in line, or be made irrelevant.

10
7U5K3Nreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

She's the new Mr rogers or for us east Tennessee folk... Dolly Parton.

If you stand against Mrs Rachel... You're wrong.

Imho

42

People against Ms Rachel are akin to that time Mr Rogers had to sue the KKK for impersonating him to spread their hate filled message.

Or when Fox News slandered him. At least the KKK was smart enough (barf) to try to imitate his style for evil. Fox is too dumb even for that.

When you attack the helpers, you're bad.

25
lemmy.zip

With my crystal ball, I predict that this gif is gonna become the hottest commodity in the world roughly twice every two years in May and November for a while.

29

Don't forget about states with off year elections! Virginia legislature and governor elections are on odd years, and I'm sure we're not alone. Every year is an election year!

6
aramis87reply
fedia.io

yoinks to hdd. Thanks for sharing this!

28
slrpnk.net

DNC leadership is pathetic. They have the most popular political leader in the country standing right alongside them and they can't even support the guy, all because they lack the spine to tell their Israeli paylords to suck nut. Fucking corpo leech cowards.

226
neatcheereply
piefed.social

They're not cowards. They know exactly what they're doing. Mamdani doesn't play ball with their established process. He is a threat to their paychecks and control. Mamdani just indicated to all of them "You might be the next one to lose your job if I decide I want someone else in your district".

They are not cowards. They are strategists prioritizing their own wants above that of the voters and human decency

107
piefed.ca

They are strategists prioritizing their own wants above that of the voters and human decency

Right, that's what we said. Cowards.

56
neatcheereply
piefed.social

Greed and selfishness aren't a form of cowardice, as far as I'm aware? To be cowardly, there must be a thing you are afraid of, the fear of which is preventing you from doing something you want or feel that you need to do

Don't let them off with just being scared. They're selfish and amoral

25

Being brave is doing the right thing despite being scared. Being a coward is doing the wrong thing because you're scared of doing what you know is right. Jefferies is scared of AIPAC, he's scared of losing the money and power they lend him.

2

No, it's really not, and you give them too much credit by saying that.

Greed for these people is about having the biggest dick in the room. It's about superiority and "winning".

It's far more distasteful than fear

EDIT: And furthermore, having fear doesn't make you a coward. Cowardice is, again, when there is something you want or think you should do but you refuse due to fear of something.

They just want to be rich. Even if it's fear of poverty, that's not cowardice.

16

Fuck any congressional Democrats that are upset they are getting ousted for progressive candidates...you work for us not them

20
lemmy.world

he has to apologize for being aligned with what voters want? isn't that, as political scientists call it, the whole fucking point of democracy?

106

Take a way the overt racism and bigotry and the DNC and GOP leadership play the same game for the same team.

1
lemmy.world

You of course know that america isn't really a democracy. It's a republic by design. And of course what it is in reality is a whole nuther something.

5
Schmooreply
slrpnk.net

A republic is a type of democracy. Specifically, it's a representative democracy.

7
lemmy.world

When people say democracy, they usually mean direct democracy.
And even at that, the party establishment control who we can even vote for. So we only get to choose from the representatives they give us for the most part.

0

When people say democracy, they usually mean direct democracy.

This just isn't true. The majority of democracies around the world today are representative democracies, and people colloquially refer to them simply as democracies.

And even at that, the party establishment control who we can even vote for. So we only get to choose from the representatives they give us for the most part.

That's partly true to varying degrees depending on what country you're referring to, but it also isn't that simple. The methods the establishment uses to control who gets party nominations are mostly indirect (i.e. media manipulating the narrative, PACs and dark money to campaigns, etc.). I think you're being overly cynical - which is fair - but we have more power than you think we do, we're just not very good at using it. Cynicism itself is one of the ways that the establishment controls who gets elected.

In short: the establishment has a stranglehold on democracy not because our democracies are fake (flawed, maybe even rigged a bit, sure, but not fake), but because they have us out-organized.

2
literature.cafe

A representative democracy like the US and a republic are literally the same fucking thing

3

Yes, I was being lazy typing. But when people say democracy, they usually mean direct democracy. And based on context, that was the meaning I took.

1
tomiantreply
piefed.social

This dumbass "republic not democracy" take has got to die already.

10

It's true. When people say democracy, they usually mean direct democracy. That ain't what we got. We have a representative democracy, often called a republic. And even at that, the party establishment control who we can even vote for. So we only get to choose from the representatives they give us for the most part.

1
sh.itjust.works

It is a democracy, just a shitty type of one. There's a bunch of different types and only like one is direct representation where every citizen votes on every issue and every time humans have tried that, they get real particular about what qualifies as citizen so it's all more or less the same. Anyway, if you're past high school you should probably retire that line of thinking because it's reductive, useless, and actually false.

2

Also, I would like to see a workable plan for increasing what we vite for without going full direct. But it's really hard to remove the influence advertising can have on such thing.

1

When people say democracy, they usually mean direct democracy. That ain't what we got. We have a representative democracy, often called a republic. And even at that, the party establishment control who we can even vote for. So we only get to choose from the representatives they give us for the most part. So what we have is the illusion of choice.

1

Welcome to actual democracy, fuck face. Jeffries is an embarrassment. You want your shitty candidates to win? Put up better candidates. Mamdani isn't a congressional rep. He can do whatever the fuck he wants and Jefferies can cry about it to Israel, his true ally.

52
Garbagioreply
lemmy.zip

Man don't do my man Lurch like that. Clearly Jeffries is a fishman from Innsmouth.

7
lemmy.myserv.one

Don’t insult the Deep Ones like that. Jeffries is like the toilet paper stuck to your shoe as you walk out of the bathroom.

6
Garbagioreply
lemmy.zip

Nah Cthulu is willing to exercise power. Bro's a blobfish, through and through. "But they only look like that from extreme decompression!" Bro do you know how tight AIPAC's assholes really are?

3

Blobfish are important part of the ecosystem in the deep ocean. Jefferies is more like the turd that won't come out AIPAC's ass.

1
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I’d argue that Jeffries is the exact opposite of a DINO. He’s literally the minority leader. He is exactly what establishment democrats want. And that is the problem. He’s not a DINO, because he’s literally the face of the party. Democrats are simply too far right. And Mamdani is doing his best to drag the Overton window back to the left, even with the establishment democrats kicking and screaming.

But also, Mamdani wasn’t born in the US, and is therefore unable to run for president. Nor could he be in any seat that is in the chain of succession for the spot of POTUS. So for instance, he couldn’t be VP, the speaker, any of the presidential cabinet members, etc… Because all of those are potential future presidents, so allowing him to be in one of those spots would cause a constitutional crisis if he is the only one remaining and is ineligible.

24
Tolosreply
lemmy.world

Gosh, wouldn't want a constitutional crisis.

16
Asidonhoporeply
lemmy.world

According to The Constitution we should have been having a Constitutional Convention every few years (3 years? 4? 5? 6? Who knows) so maybe we should make up for lost time.

8

I don't think the rules of succession state he can't be speaker of the house. If it came to it he would be skipped over for the next in line

4
Bubs12reply
lemmy.cafe

He was not born in the US so he is not allowed to run for president

9

We have a rapist in office, who is almost certainly a Russian asset. Why should the rules selectively apply to Mamdani?

6
lemmy.world

That's not the bar. You have to be a natural US citizen. You can be born outside of the US with US parents and you would be a natural citizen. Ted Cruz was allowed to run despite being born in Canada because his parents were US citizens. It's just one of the many reasons the whole Obama birth certificate thing was stupid. Even if he was born in Kenya he still would have been eligible because is mom is a US citizen.

10
prolereply
lemmy.blahaj.zone

Why is this getting upvoted like it's up for debate?

Mamdani is not eligible to run for president. That's just fact.

It's not the same situation as Cruz.

2

I mean, he's every bit as eligible according to the letter of the law and constitution as Trump was to run in '24.

1
lemmy.world

Because it's a fact. I never said Mamdani is eligible for president. I just said that being born in the US isn't the bar for being eligible.

1
lemmy.world

It's not irrelevant because I was correcting the incorrect information. Having correct information is important. That's how disinformation spreads.

1

It's not disinformation, it's discussing relevant details and not delineating every arcane requirement every single time we discuss if someone is eligible for president or any other question like that.

1

You can be a natural-born citizen if you're born in another country to parents who are US citizens. Mamdani's parents weren't US citizens, he wasn't born in the US, and he is not a natural-born citizen. He is a naturalized citizen, which is a different thing, and he is ineligible to run for president under the current US Constitution (which I guess technically still exists?)

4
lemmy.world

Fuck Jeffries, he is not a "top Democrat" he's been a lame duck for all but two weeks of this term because neoliberals lost the DNC and the accompanying victory fund right after his leadership election.

He has no political power in congress, and no one from his own party has reason to listen to him.

He might as well be an empty chair, but he definitely ain't winning a House leadership position again.

81
webheadreply
lemmy.world

He also just sucks. After the interview he did with Jon Stewart on his podcast, I really knew more than ever what an empty shell of a person he was. I was ambivalent before that but that was the final straw I think. He needs to go. We need real leadership in the Democratic party and he's not it.

1

what an empty shell of a person he was.

That's his purpose...

He was handpicked by Pelosi, and a biased DNC threatened to bankrupt any state party who's reps didn't vote for him.

The current DNC has been dumping that money back on state parties for almost two years now. Even if someone thought they might pull the same shit, they won't have the funds to do it by then, and the state parties are already funded.

The "victory fund" was the stick neoliberals used, and Martin broke it into pieces and passed it around. It the bottom up structure the Dem party was always meant to have.

1

“work to do in terms of the conversations that he’s going to have with members of Congress moving forward.”

Hilarious that he's so worked up about a fucking mayor..... Like what is Congress going to do to a mayor if he doesn't want to talk to congressional members?

13
bitjunkiereply
lemmy.world

Stern finger-wagging like they've been doing to Trump for a fucking decade. Feckless idiots.

1

How about Dem leadership has some "serious work to do" to smooth things over with New York voters for failing to represent them?

51
lemmy.world

Jeffries can suck a fart through a hose. Calling that man inept would be a grave insult to the proud, inept people of the world.

48

True. He's essentially controlled opposition. But even so, he's terrible at the job he was hired to do: corralling the Dem vote. As shitty as Nancy Pelosi was, at least she knew how to keep her people in line. Jeffries can't even manage that. I would call him useless, but if he were simply useless, that would actually be better. He's actively harmful.

6

Is Jeffries getting whitening therapy or has he just been dead long enough for that pastiness to set in?

8

Well guess what, Hakeem, we're sick of your establishment asses. We want actual things to get done and actual change to happen and have some people representing us with some fucking balls who understand modern problems. We want people who can't be bought. We want people who aren't just going with the flow and doing what the opposite side wants anyway. You and Chuck Schumer are not it.

26

I hope Mamdani's "work" involves telling these people to go fuck themselves with a big smile.

16
ryperreply
lemmy.ca

His primary was yesterday too, and he was unopposed. If he's getting primaried it won't be until at least 2028.

14

If Mamdani’s picks are elected to Congress, it seems to me it’s Jeffries who’s going to need to do some serious work. Of the non-Congressional kind.

14

At first I was kind of surprised when I saw that this seemingly positively progressive headline was coming from HuffPost. And then I read the article. And it is a typical HuffPost article.

These people won't learn until we beat it into them with our votes.

4

Why? Congressional and establishment Democrats did everything they could to sabotage his campaign, as well as the campaigns of every Progressive out there - and they got elected because they're actually working for change, not just facism-lite.

7

fuckwits ya had your chances y'all been borderline fuckin maga anyway, I'll vote for anyone Mamadani suggests, again AOC, Bernie and the black Lady from Texas who's name escapes me as I write this, all get my vote if possible

9

Jefferies can go fuck himself.

That Zionist, Israel paid, genocide loving asshole should be yeeted into the fucking sun along with all other establishment Dems.

8
fedinsfw.app

Only through unity and voting for progressives will the US make it out of this quagmire against the Nazi Magats.

7

Hey Hakeem Jeffery how about doing something meaningful and helpful for your constituents and the country at large. Rather than being just another spineless, feckless coward? How about understanding that the people choice Mandani and the candidates he supported? How about understanding that the people are fed the fuck up with you and the establishment’s endorsement of right wing and far right wing ideals? Have you considered that asshole? Doubt it. Send another strongly worded letter, surely the 11,000th one will be the one that will finally impact change…

7

Smooth things over... like with a steamroller? No, Mamdani is not a violent person, but the conversations with Congressional Democrats should all be along the lines of, "buh-bye."

6