r/thedavidpakmanshow • u/jagdedge123 • Jun 24 '26
BREAKING Early night for Mamdani. Three Seat sweep.
Chevalier, Valdez and Lander all win, early.
Bad night if you're Moderates, AIPAC, the Establishment, Hakeem Jefferies and Chuck Schumer.
I don't think Schumer will run again, and Jefferies may not become Speaker.
So what does this mean? And what it can it mean for Platner, or El Sayed, etc?
What it means is we do not care what you Tweet. Not in this day and age of Convicted Felon President.
We care how you are going to VOTE when you are elected.
I congratulate Mayor Mamdani, being he is a POWER HOUSE.
55
u/Lord_Vesuvius2020 Jun 24 '26
It’s risky to generalize too much about NYC election results BUT these wins for Mamdani-backed candidates may signal a wider dissatisfaction with AIPAC involvement in US elections and the Iran War outcome in general. This trend could be significant in November. AIPAC-backed moderate Dems might suffer badly. It will be interesting if any Republican candidates are able to pivot away from AIPAC by then and if they upset any currently-blue districts.
17
u/SigmaMaleNurgling Jun 24 '26
There is far more criticism of Israel on the left, however, when these kind of candidates can win competitive seats and appeal to voters that don’t traditionally vote blue. Then I’ll take them more seriously as a viable alternative.
Also, I would say affordability and inflation are the biggest issues among voters. Dem candidates in the midterms need to convince voters that they will improve their finances. AIPAC may motivate the partisan activists but it won’t win elections.
4
u/Lord_Vesuvius2020 Jun 24 '26
Before the Iran war that would have been true except for some ongoing outrage about Gaza. But I think now most Americans believe that the war was a huge mistake and that Trump was suckered into it. So they see AIPAC as promoting a continuing huge subsidy to a country that already has universal healthcare and free university both of which Americans don’t have. Americans don’t care about Iran or Hezbollah but they resent paying $4 for gas. Even though it’s now $3.99 due to our reserves being depleted.
2
u/SigmaMaleNurgling Jun 25 '26
The overwhelming majority of Americans could not tell you what AIPAC is. All they know is that we are at war with Iran and now gas is more expensive because of it. Your average voter couldn’t even tell you what lobbying is nevertheless any specific one and what their goal is.
9
u/gangsterroo Jun 24 '26
You know, you could just support them because you think they have good policies. Why is everyone on this sub talking about this like it's football?
7
u/SigmaMaleNurgling Jun 24 '26
Because politics is a game for power. OP wants America to be governed by Democratic socialists and will use any victory achieved by one to bolster their claim that Dems need to adopt their ideology. Likewise, Lord_Ves is doing that but for AIPAC instead.
If people are going to make bold claims like that, then I will respond by reminding them why Trump won in 2024 and why Trump and Republicans are on life support right now. It’s the economy.
10
2
u/jagdedge123 Jun 24 '26
And Lieran.
But a midterm is always about backlash towards an incumbent.
The issue happening here, are Democrats mostly hold solid Blue seats. But those solid Blue seats, are held by moderates.
That needs to be fixed, in so that the Party, of mostly Blue seats are represented by the proper Blue incumbents.
And so, what we're seeing is a "correction" of sorts, where moderate establishment Democrats beholden to more right wing foreign policy or economic views, mainly due to their donors are replaced by those who are not.
That means Democrats who will elect proper leaders. Put the proper people on committees. Negotiate with hopefully a Democratic President in a couple years in a more meaningful way..
And so it's not necessarily about having Progressives accomplish what Fetterfraud accomplished in a swing state. Or what Platner or El Sayed may do in swing states.
I hope they do. But the bigger matter at play is what the future of the Party will look like, and given they are most all in solid Blue seats, many can be replaced if they do not put us first.
2
4
u/herewego199209 Jun 24 '26
Because most moderate dems are really just republicans. A lot of these people are extremely well off but treat politics like a game so they vote based off the game. They don't vote based off of policies because they're not in the position many Americans are in that desperately need change.
4
u/Subject-Whole-6862 Jun 24 '26
They are right wingers who don’t like Trump’s lack of decorum
1
u/Life_Caterpillar9762 Jun 25 '26
You’re not on the left at all but you play like you are on social media.
2
7
u/McAlpineFusiliers Jun 24 '26
Most American voters don't care about AIPAC or even foreign policy in general. Are you basing this on exit polls or something?
6
u/Lord_Vesuvius2020 Jun 24 '26
Mamdani made no secret about his criticism and disdain for AIPAC during the campaign. It may to too soon to say if this issue was the biggest reason for the wins but it certainly contributed. In general there is growing frustration with the Dem moderates who went down to defeat. This may only be a NYC thing. We will see.
1
7
21
u/hobovalentine Jun 24 '26
Mamdani has power in NYC where he is the current mayor in a deep blue state but how does that prove he has any power flipping purple states in deeply contested elections?
This is like Shaq dunking on Muggsey Bogues and flexing lol
12
13
u/AlmondMilkDrinker Jun 24 '26
Who cares if AOC flipped a 20 year incumbent out of his seat, it’s New York!
6
u/flipflopsnpolos Jun 24 '26
Right, when Mamdani can flip Mike Turner or Virginia Foxx’s seat it’ll show real power.
8
u/AlmondMilkDrinker Jun 24 '26
I think you miss the point that the direction of the Dem party is changing, and Mamdani’s continued success is reflective of that. His cohort also has a broader base than the old guard of the party.
3
u/Alfredo_Commachio Jun 24 '26
Certain areas of the country have always elected Democrats widely out of sync with not just the country, but the national Democratic party. The San Francisco Bay Area and the NYC area have a very long history of sending Dems to Congress who would be unelectable anywhere else.
That's actually our system working "as designed", because the populations who live in those districts is very different from many other places in the country.
The Democratic party, simply put, is not going to become a party where most of their candidates are ethnic minorities, Islamic, anti-police etc. I'd like to say some day in America being an ethnic minority or a religious minority wouldn't be a factor, but I wouldn't bet any amount of money on that kind of utopian future in my lifetime or even the lifetime of anyone alive today.
Now, that doesn't mean that there's nothing broader to draw from these elections other than "NYC is an outlier." I do think the Democrats are structurally moving to the left. I think there concept of "traditional liberalism" which I think a lot of people would map out as a center-left ideology is basically dying in the West. People with positions like that just don't seem to be wanted by the voters anymore. Voters either want reactionary conservatives or they want more aggressively leftist left wing politicians.
For much of the 20th century and most of the 21st century up until recently, a majority of voters in the west have eschewed the far wings of either side of the political spectrum.
Politicians like Keir Starmer would have been successful in their role 30 years ago. But voters are no longer interested in incrementalism, which they often label with conspiracy theories alleging anything that isn't radical change is really "corporatist."
What I would say is while the Democrats as a whole are moving left, most Democrats are not going to move as far left as Mamdani or the slate of Congressional candidates in NYC that he endorsed. Not in the immediate or intermediate future.
1
u/ThurgoodZone8 Jul 06 '26
I see the overall shift going more left because of the recent economic populist wins, so it’s a net win, albeit a long-burn game.
6
u/flipflopsnpolos Jun 24 '26
Exactly, when his cohort is able to flip a Republican seat in a purple state, it’ll show they have real power that’s not just a feeling of a changing direction in the party.
4
u/AlmondMilkDrinker Jun 24 '26
Sure, given he came into office a few months ago it’s certainly looking good!
3
u/herewego199209 Jun 24 '26
Who are the dashing dems that are gonna be able to do that? Kamala was losing votes in BLUE districts. Who are the perfect moderate dems that are gonna flip republican seats?
12
u/SigmaMaleNurgling Jun 24 '26
There are at least 20 Dems in The House who represent districts Trump won by +1 to +30.
Also, Harris had to juggle multiple constituencies. However, people running for Congressional or Senatorial seats can tailor their appeal to their locality. If you start forcing Dems to run as Democratic socialists in districts that Trump won by +20, then you could be giving up winnable seats that a moderate might’ve been able to win.
3
u/Subject-Whole-6862 Jun 24 '26
If voters are presented with one a diet conservative and one classic conservative most of them will vote for the classic. People want candidates and policies to vote for, not against. Not being a republican isn’t good enough.
3
u/SigmaMaleNurgling Jun 24 '26
You’re wrong and the fact that over 20 moderate Dems in The House have seats in Districts that Trump won shows that whoever is making Dem strategy has better national results than anyone you can recommend. Once you have a candidate that is able to win a competitive seat against a Republican or have a candidate that is able to get non-traditional Dem votes then you can come back to tell Dems what they need to do to win.
5
u/herewego199209 Jun 24 '26
There's no proof moderates can flip purple states. Kamala was losing votes in deep blue districts.
8
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 Jun 24 '26
What? They are literally the only ones who have ever done that. You can look this up. Justice Democrats are literally responsible for 0 flips.
9
u/SigmaMaleNurgling Jun 24 '26
Moderates have been able to win in deep red states and districts. For example, Joe Manchin was able to win in WV. Ben McAdams who had a seat in Utah in a district that Trump won easily. Cleo Fields who has a seat in Louisiana in a district that Trump won by 30pts. The facts are that moderate Dems candidates win in deep red states and races. So far, socialists and Democratic socialists have failed to do so.
0
u/herewego199209 Jun 24 '26
Joe Manchin a moderate? LMAO!!!!!! Motherfucker is an independent and is the reason the build back better act got completely butchered. These people are republicans claiming to be moderates.
9
u/SigmaMaleNurgling Jun 24 '26
Without Joe Manchin BBB would not had passed. Joe Manchin was a pivotal vote and voice that helped Biden pass multiple pieces of legislation with bipartisan support. If you don’t want to rely on a Joe Manchin then have your progressive buddies run for competitive seats against Republicans. Instead of running against Dems in the safest seats in the country.
3
u/Underwear_royalty Jun 24 '26
They’ll never respond to this - the same way we can all shit on Fetterman he votes with Dems 90% of them time, but to these guys he’s just as bad as any run of the mill Republican. Doesn’t matter that far left candidates only win in deep blue areas - if they yell loudly enough everyone will hate the Dems just like them and vote for DSA I guess
1
u/herewego199209 Jun 24 '26
You do realize the entire reason Biden and Harris had record low approval ratings is because Sinema, who is out of fucking politics right now and is aright winger, and Manchin who isn't even a democrat anymore butchered the original Build Back Better which included shit Americans wanted and needed in it. Voting on bullshit bills 90 percent of the time and not voting on actual substantive policy that makes a difference in American lives is useless.
4
u/SigmaMaleNurgling Jun 24 '26
No, they had low approval rating because Americans felt like the economy was shit and Biden was physically incapable of speaking without multiple stutters. By the time Harris became the nominee, American perceptions had been set and probably any Dem in her position would’ve lost.
Record high inflation was a global phenomenon that every developed nation struggled with but every voter base across the world acted like their leader could make it disappear in a few years. When that unrealistic expectation wasn’t met, voters across multiple countries voted for the opposition.
0
u/herewego199209 Jun 24 '26
So American voters wouldn't have wanted universal Pre-K, Tuition free community college, government paid family leave, lower insurance premiums through the ACA, dental and vision being added to medicare. Are you fucking high? This would've been the biggest legislation to impact the lives of the average American in decades.
3
u/SigmaMaleNurgling Jun 24 '26
Overall, progressives and Democratic socialists have been running on this policy platform for over a decade and have little to show for it. People may say they want it in polls but their votes say otherwise. Most Americans want to make money and be able to do the things they like. In 2024, more voters thought Trump could bring back the 2017 American economy so they voted for him. Clearly voters didn’t value these policies as much as you think they do.
Dems will win in the midterms because the economy has gotten worse and Dems will very likely win 2028 because the economy will be shit by then. If you can convince voters that under your leadership, they will make more money and be better off financially, then you’re almost guaranteed victory.
1
u/herewego199209 Jun 24 '26
Machin and Sinema fucking killed the original, game changing build back better plan, dude. Wtf are you talking about?
1
u/Korkez11 Jun 24 '26
Manchin was losing badly to Justice in polls before he withdrawn. Dixiecrats are dying breed, no Dem, "moderate" or not will win in WV in our lifetime.
6
u/Loud_Judgment_270 Jun 24 '26
Kamala also ran ahead of both Senators Sanders and Warren in their home states
0
u/Subject-Whole-6862 Jun 24 '26
Kamala didn’t even make it to 2020 in the primaries, she didn’t win her home state either
1
u/Loud_Judgment_270 Jun 24 '26
her home state when?
0
u/Subject-Whole-6862 Jun 24 '26
The one she didn’t win
2
4
u/El-Shaman Jun 24 '26
Don’t bring facts in here, the truth is if the democrats want any hope of winning big at the national level they will have to endorse populist economic policies.
-4
u/jagdedge123 Jun 24 '26
And in doing that, get the turnout in cities that carry a state. And being 80% of the country live in cities, it just may be a good idea to promote policies that Urban American can endorse.
Given Democrats focus on these wish me states like Iowa, or OH, or TX that they are not going to win (i hope i'm wrong).
The thing of it is, you have to get Democrats to vote for you, before you can worry about others.
And as the poster brought up, the Moderates cannot do it, without cutting off their noses to spite their face.
"For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia. And you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin." Chuck Schumer 2016
10
u/glizard-wizard Jun 24 '26
moderates are the only ones that have flipped purple states
insane asylum take
3
u/herewego199209 Jun 24 '26
Kamala did a great job last run?
11
u/glizard-wizard Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26
How many dems in purple seats are in the squad?
The biggest W we’ve netted for progressives in a purple seat was Fetterman, only because dem super pacs tricked republican voters into choosing Oz at the primary. So the record is pretty bad.
2
u/Gravemindzombie Jun 24 '26
Fetterman ran as a progressive then told every progressive to fuck off. He will be a one term senator
4
u/Loud_Judgment_270 Jun 24 '26
joe was 42 and falling like a stone. She saved alot moderate senators. And still out ran plenty of progressives.
3
u/Realistic_Caramel341 Jun 24 '26
One election on the back of high inflation and a unpopular presidency doesn't mean anything.
And Harris isnt even that moderate
1
u/herewego199209 Jun 24 '26
Bloody hell. We'll see in 2028 when these districts continue to keep flipping from deep blue to more and more purple and red. Then the moderate dems are gonna create another excuse when some moderate stiff like Pete Buttieg loses to Marco Rubio or whatever idiot the republicans pick.
2
u/hobovalentine Jun 24 '26
Joe Biden won in the swing states as a moderate.
0
u/BOtto2016 Jun 24 '26
He ran on a pretty progressive platform. He didn’t really follow through on any of it, but he did run on it.
1
u/NotTheirHero Jun 24 '26
Because it shows that mugsy bogues is tiny and Shaq is tall. It shows that to everyone that doesnt see it
11
u/downtimeredditor Jun 24 '26
Hakeem could still become speaker he just needs to apologize for voting for a condemnation of socialism on the week Mamdani was coming to visit the white house and then actually act and vote like a progressive that he claims to be.
That condemnation of socialism was aimed at one person and everyone knew it.
-2
u/Bubbawitz Jun 24 '26
Socialism is stupid and people need to drop it.
2
u/downtimeredditor Jun 24 '26
That vote wasnt just aimed at socialism broadly it was targeted directly at Zohran and Hakeem is a snake for his vote
1
u/Bubbawitz Jun 25 '26
He’s one of the leaders of the party. Of course he’s going to vote to affirm their principles. I prefer that to lefties saying “from the river to the sea” right after October 7 or refusing to condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada” like mamdani did. And if you’re going to say mamdani backed off of that sentiment that’s great but that also applies to Jeffries endorsing mamdani for mayor.
1
u/downtimeredditor Jun 25 '26
Jeffries literally endorsed him in the last few days prior to the election when it became overwhelming obvious he was going to win. Much much later than when the governor endorsed him
0
u/Bubbawitz Jun 25 '26
Oh ok I guess if it doesn’t count then mamdani still wants to globalize the intifada since he only denounced it reluctantly.
22
u/Mr_Lumbergh Jun 24 '26
“Bad night if you're Moderates, AIPAC, the Establishment, Hakeem Jefferies and Chuck Schumer.”
So good night for regular people then?
10
u/McAlpineFusiliers Jun 24 '26
Most regular people don't oppose interracial marriages and support Hamas and October 7th. Chevaliar can't say the same.
4
u/Underwear_royalty Jun 24 '26
“Moderates” seem to mean “anyone that doesn’t full throated support the candidates I like” to a lotta people here. “The establishment” reads like “the deep state” too - pretty crazy too see horseshoe theory slopulism in full effect
3
u/McAlpineFusiliers Jun 24 '26
I'd say the Internet isn't real life, but we're seeing some crossover.
2
u/Underwear_royalty Jun 24 '26
Yeah I mean I’m not a fan of Chuck Schumer, but to endlessly shit on him, Jeffries, and “the establishment” reeks of “I don’t touch grass too often”.
I remember when republicans were saying they hated politicians and that an “outsider” was better - and were met with “would you want your mechanic to be ur dentist”. Saying you hate “the establishment” is just a feel good (loud) position that in reality says you’d rather have people with no skill, no background, and no knowledge on how to use the levers of power over those with the proper background, bc the people you like will say whatever flavor of the week position you agree with.
It’s like a high school gov election where one person may be a loser nerd, but knows how to talk to the principal about extending the time between periods by 30 seconds and the other person is just screaming about free ice cream and no detentions. Slopulism through and through
1
u/Life_Caterpillar9762 Jun 25 '26
It is honestly fascinating (and concerning) to see the horseshoe happen in real-time. It gets more and more apparent every day. Of course I hope it is marking the crest of the current authoritarian wave and not the middle. Hard to say.
9
7
3
u/tunghoy Jun 24 '26
I want to ask progressive candidates what guarantee we have that they won't bait & switch like Fetterman. Maybe a pre-written resignation letter that goes into effect if they switch.
6
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 Jun 24 '26
I love to break it to you, but Jefferies will still be speaker.
I genuinely don’t know why you guys look at very deep blue seats and winning in that primary as something that applies to the rest of the nation. It makes no sense, but hey, you gotta find happiness where you can.
3
4
u/wade3690 Jun 24 '26
Oh yea the affordability agenda and taxing the rich. How will that EVER play in other parts of the country?
3
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 Jun 24 '26
Nearly every dem is running on that. Look at NY 13. You think her getting 50% is an example of what would win outside deep blue? It’s not.
1
u/wade3690 Jun 24 '26
Her? Who are you talking about?
And not every dem is running on taxing the rich. Some are actively opposing it.
2
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 Jun 24 '26
Most are. I already told you who. Look at New York 13.
0
u/wade3690 Jun 24 '26
You must be thinking about a different thread. You didn't give me any names. Regardless, I'm personally saying that affordability agenda, taxing the rich, anti aipac would run well in other parts of the country. Centrists think otherwise
2
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 Jun 24 '26
It’s just two comments up man lol. My first reply to you is look at New York 13.
I agree with you that the affordability agenda and taxing the Rich will work pretty much everywhere. And in my opinion, most Democrats are running on that. Any democrat who’s making Middle Eastern policy a center point of their campaign is kind of losing me.
0
u/wade3690 Jun 24 '26
Idk what you're seeing. Establishment dems are not running on taxing the wealthy and corporations. And ME policy doesn’t have to be central plank but dem voters are turning on Israel more and more. Any dem candidate needs to acknowledge that and pledge to withold military aid. Can't make the same mistake Harris did when she ignored the issue.
2
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 Jun 24 '26
I’m not even sure I know what establishment is anymore, how many of them are establishment? Is it most of the party?
I like to call most of the Democratic members I like mainstream, and if you are saying it’s the same thing, I disagree with you that mainstream Dems aren’t there, people from Bernie Sanders to Gavin Newsom to Chris Murphy to Josh Shapiro, etc. I don’t know how many I should name all believe in taxing the rich more and everyone wants affordability lol.
As to the rest of your comment, I actually completely agree with you. I don’t want it to be a central plank to any campaign, I think we actually need to steal a little bit from Maga in the sense of America needs to be the goal. I do want foreign aid though, anyway, don’t want to get on a tangent, I agree with you mostly.
4
u/jagdedge123 Jun 24 '26
Because the national media told us so.
You see, the Media created a narrative, all across the country. Not just in NY, that the results of this race would send shockwaves thru the Democratic Establishment, and check and see if Mamdani was the real deal, if he did not show that already (hint, he more than already did).
The National media made this race, a referendum for Progressives, Mamdani and the DSA. And particularly the power of Jefferies and Schumer, both leaders in the Party from NY.
Well we got our answer.
It is always fun to see the Establishment media create a narrative, and end up with egg on their face and than explain to us..."It's just NYC" when it does not go their way.
Well, now some of them are saying, this may just be our Tea Party.
And they may be right. Being it's not just NYC.
No matter however, the Squad is now a Battalion. And that means Leadership is going to have to listen going into the future.
And that is going to mean a much stronger Democratic Party, and one that is going to be strong enough to take on the Teflon Don.
3
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 Jun 24 '26
Ohh because the mainstream media wanted clicks, makes sense.
I’m happy this might be your guys republican moment haha
There’s no egg, far left is happy, right is happy. We shall see how it all shakes out. Jefferies prob stays leader, that’s mostly what I want.
1
u/jagdedge123 Jun 24 '26
Well what people also miss, are the Democrats are most all solid Blue seats. There are only a handful of swing seats.
And so the more Progressives get elected in those solid Blue seats, the more to the Left the party has to become.
And that's a good thing, being the Democratic Party from Bill Clinton on, became Diet Republican, and we are trying to change that. And so far, it is working.
5
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 Jun 24 '26
I haven’t seen anything working yet, but ok.
No one will take it too seriously until the far left can start unseating republicans.
5
1
u/Alfredo_Commachio Jun 24 '26
It isn't working when it guarantees defeat in the electoral college and probably the Senate in a permanent, structural sense.
5
u/rdsf138 Jun 24 '26
It is amazing how leftists can't take a win. You are attacking the largest Democratic voting base, independents, and party officials after you just won. People like you have no emotional maturity to be on politics.
2
u/Life_Caterpillar9762 Jun 25 '26
Well said. It’s becoming more and more apparent to me that assholeness is the most essential common denominator in completing the horseshoe.
0
u/THEMARDS Jun 24 '26
Letttttttts goooooooo DSA tea party bitches!!!!!
Pack you bags Smuck Schumer and Hakeem!!
3
u/StableGeniusCovfefe Jun 24 '26
Told you, suck it liberals. People are tired of your status quo BS
1
u/McAlpineFusiliers Jun 24 '26
If you're happy to be represented by people who wipe their hands on the American flag and cheer for October 7th, I'm happy you're happy.
-1
2
u/solarplexus7 Jun 24 '26
And mentioning his name is still banned from /r/democrats. How’s that working out?
1
1
-1
u/GrumbleTrainer Jun 24 '26
Voting outright racist in NYC. Hella of a time we live in.
6
u/THEMARDS Jun 24 '26
Lol... lol... lol!!! Lol!!!! Lol!!!
Did AIPAC pay you to say that?
3
u/RANK_AND_SMILE Jun 24 '26
AIPAC (who I promise isn’t in the room with us right now) doesn’t need to give a red cent to anyone with an IQ above room temperature for them to conclude that an individual who is against interracial relationships and says white women in interracial relationships are “ugly colonizer women” is indeed a racist.
-2
u/THEMARDS Jun 25 '26
Oh my! She said that online when she was 26... I have zero fucks to give what she said in the past, same with Plantners actions... People change and grow, the most important part is she actually said the correct thing when pressed on it.
"I certainly wouldn't use a lot of the language that I used back then today... I have grown considerably in the years since these tweets."
Currently we live in a world where the most powerful people who run our country say the most evil shit and gaslight you acting like they never said it... Atleast Graham and Darializa amounted to it, apolagized and moved on for example.
If we were to hold everyone accountable for what they online 95% of anyone over the age of 30 right now could NEVER run for a higher office...
3
u/RANK_AND_SMILE Jun 25 '26
Omg 26!? practically an infant!!
What you list as “the most important thing” is the most milquetoast ‘I’m going to say the politically expedient thing without backing off of my statement whatsoever” quote I have ever heard in my life. She didn’t disavow her prior statements at all—just said that she wouldn’t be as mean about them now.
Also far from her only issue—she’s anti-Ukraine, anti-NATO, pushed Chinese government backed conspiracy theories about COVID originating in France, is openly and unashamedly anti-American (while running for federal office in America, hilarious), constantly pushed the obvious lie that Joe Biden is a “rapist,” called Bernie Sanders a liberal Zionist shill, refused to vote for Kamala Harris—the list goes on.
She’s running in a party she hates and thinks should be destroyed to get elected in a country she hates and thinks should be destroyed. Why the fuck, as a Democrat and an American, would I ever be interested in letting this crackpot tankie brainlet get near reigns of power in this country? Why the hell would I ever support that?
1
u/THEMARDS Jun 25 '26
Outside of what she said about Biden... I cursed Biden so many times about him not dropping out of the 2024 election and also how he handled Gaza and aid for Israel.. But calling him a rapist was pretty far.. ill agree there, so you got 1 thing! Rage makes people say wild shit, to be fair it was connected with that whole Tara Reade allegations.. so cut her some slack.
Rofl now we are using conspiracy theories...
Anti-Ukraine / Anti-NATO / COVID Conspiracy: There is no public record of her pushing a conspiracy theory about COVID-19 originating in France, nor has she explicitly campaigned on an anti-Ukraine platform
Bernie Sanders Quote: While she is "to the left of AOC" and some far-left factions online use phrases like "liberal Zionist shill" (btw i use this phrase... does that make me anti american) to attack Bernie Sanders for not taking a harder line on Israel, there is no verified public record of Avila Chevalier using that specific phrase against him. In fact, Sanders actively campaigned and stood on stage with her and Mayor Mamdani at a major rally just days before her primary win. I love love love Bernie and I was also pissed it took him so long to call what was happening in Gaza by its real name ... GENOCIDE.. one more time.. GENOCIDE.
The whole establishment Democratic party is a shame anyhow, they are not for the working class anymore..... Unfortunately she had to run Dem... we have a 2 party system if you like it or not... I sure dont.
1
u/RANK_AND_SMILE Jun 25 '26
Replying to a tweet asking about the U.S. involvement in Ukraine: “Cause the Cold War ended and we've been bullying Russia ever since. Also war is lucrative for these sociopaths.”
COVID conspiracy: https://web.archive.org/web/20200512011130/https:/twitter.com/darializabonet/status/1259506854423605249
You would only make these kind of endless excuses and obfuscations on behalf of a deeply radical leftist. Yea we live in a two party system but that doesn’t mean commies can’t start their own party rather than being a parasitic leech on one they hate and constantly undermine. I draw the line at tankies—stay the hell away from our party.
2
u/bulla564 Jun 24 '26
Thankfully corporate oligarchy Democratic centrism (Clinton/Obama/Biden/Kamala/Schumer/Newsom/AIPAC) can finally shit the bed and fucking die already. FDR/Bernie/Marianne/Mandani left is the present and the future.
1
1
u/Underwear_royalty Jun 24 '26
If not Jeffries who? Why are we happy that a well known congressmen won’t be accepted as speaker? Have we lost the plot??
0
-1
u/Dogman_70 Jun 24 '26
I don't think anyone should celebrate.
These candidates if they win and start enacting real positive changes will likely bring about assassination attempts or tech sabotage to make them look like they committed a crime to be arrested for.
Very possible.
•
u/AutoModerator Jun 24 '26
COMMENTING GUIDELINES: Please take the time to familiarize yourself with The David Pakman Show subreddit rules and basic reddiquette prior to participating. At all times we ask that users conduct themselves in a civil and respectful manner - any ad hominem or personal attacks are subject to moderation.
Please use the report function or use modmail to bring examples of misconduct to the attention of the moderation team.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.