- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 11/5/25 at 1:51 pm to goldennugget
quote:
it shows left wing populism can win and can easily peel away disaffected and angry voters who voted for right wing populism without results
Trump won 27% of the NYC vote in '24. Who in the mayoral race was supposed to get that 27% to show that Trump didn't lose those voters?
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:No one is confused about populism, larping lawyer. Mamdani was born in Uganda. As far as right wing populism goes, it's non-starter because he's not a native son.
You seem confused about what populism is, and how its tied to economic leftism.
Deciphering what populism you ascribe to, if any, comes down to who you believe are the "elite." Right wing populists like myself believe the government, the bureaucracy, and its affiliated institutions (including corporate conglomerates who own our politicians) are the elite. Left wing populism believes capitalism is the elite. If a successful private business owner has a net worth of, say, 2 million dollars and lives in a nice home and drives a nice car, he's the "elite." Their standard of "elite" is much lower, which tracks, because so many of them are self-hating, non-starter, lazy losers. As far as left wing populism goes, where you're born and from is irrelevant. In fact, it's a bargaining chip for you to receive special recognition in your grievances and need of other people's money and belongings.
While yes, left wing populism is socialism, what I'm saying as a right wing populist - which is the only correct populism as far as I'm concerned - is that Mamdani not only can't be a populist by definition, but that he isn't one altogether. He's an outsider. A globalist plant built brick by brick by the very people who right wing populists detest. He couldn't care less about native American citizens.
Perhaps I didn't use the best diction, but if I did, if you think populism only results in left wing policies, outcomes and worldviews, then it is you who's uniformed, but I'm banking on the former.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:08 pm to NIH
quote:
It’s a big deal because a leftist candidate didn’t bother wearing the “moderate” veil
Ah I don't think that means much. The Virginia AG openly talked about killing republican babies. NOVA drives much of that vote.
All this tells us is you have certain areas of the country that are a slam dunk regardless of what the candidate says. In NYC or Chicago? You could run a dead hamster in a blue shirt, as long as Obama and Clinton endorse it, and it would win. We saw that in Virginia. Obama is out ther endorsing a white woman against a black woman and the voters listened.
The left 1/3 and right 1/3 vote blindly and water is wet. Not much new here.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:11 pm to goldennugget
Yeah that’s not what happened in the slightest lol your election analysis is top notch
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:17 pm to tadman
quote:
The Mamdani win is no big deal
I'll be surprised if this guy actually survives 4 years as Mayor. Too many crazies in NYC
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:22 pm to Pettifogger
quote:Going back 2 cycles both VA and NJ have rebelled hard against the party in the WH, with a 4-6 point gain for Ds when the WH is Republican and a 12 point gain for Rs when a Dem is in the Oval.
The Virginia/NJ exits are much more alarming in that regard
Trump and the Republicans need to figure out how to bring down grocery/food prices, but if they do that, and continue to let the Dems focus on tranny issues and protecting illegals the mid-terms should be pretty positive next year
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:49 pm to VOR
quote:
NYC, New Jersey, Virginia and California combined indicates strong disaffection with MAGA wing of the Republican Party. And Trump’s shenanigans are not helpful.
No, this is fundamentally untrue. It's that the MAGA wing are upset with all the foreign focus rather than domestic.
Personally I understand why Trump is foreign focused right now. He's playing the long game, and he understands to fix our domestic economic issues that he has to fix our foreign deals; however, the short term optics are bad. He's been so hyperfocused on foreign that it is pissing off the coalition he built up based off of fixing our economy to win in 2024
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:53 pm to VOR
quote:
NYC, New Jersey, Virginia and California combined indicates strong disaffection with MAGA wing of the Republican Party. And Trump’s shenanigans are not helpful.
This has got to be a troll. A ham sandwich could run as a democrat in NY and California and win and Virginia and New Jersey are right there with them. Those people winning last night was not a surprise to anyone paying any attention at all
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:54 pm to goldennugget
quote:
it shows left wing populism can win
DEEP. BLUE. STATE. ELECTIONS. ARE. STILL. RIGGED.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:56 pm to NIH
I don't know that I agree with this, but Matt Taibbi just put out a piece that the Dem establishment is done.
LINK
quote:
If this happened eight or even four years ago, when the Bernie Sanders campaign spoke in the language of FDR and the New Deal, this might have been a more optimistic moment. Unfortunately, just as the Democratic and Republican Party bureaucracies atrophied and grew dim-witted from overconfidence over the years, the new book-averse, Tik-Tok raised population has lost touch with history. The version of the left that’s finally ascendant in American politics is the real thing, the hearts of its followers a-flutter for the rhetoric of Che and Lenin and Marx (Mamdani gave a shout-out to Nehru last night), animated by a vision of their own country as a superpower villain of imperialist oppression.
The major difference between Mamdani-style socialism and the leftism that swept over much of the globe in the last century is that this version is even dumber. It remade itself according to an ideology based less on class than a new intersectional theory of oppression that’s ridiculous, fantastical, grossly racist, and allows the old bougeoisie to play leading roles. It’s hard not to admire the innovation, which solves the problem Marxists have always complained about when it comes to the United States: a consumer economy that makes life just tolerable enough to discourage the masses from revolting. Now that rich people can be revolutionaries (by claiming gender confusion or waving some other intersectional flag), there’s no longer a need to wait for deplorable support for left revolution. Anyone can be oppressed, and they’re all welcome to join the cause. It’s brilliant!
What’s particularly ironic about last night is that the old, Clintonian version of the Democratic Party would probably be sitting in the White House right now if it hadn’t submitted to so many of the (deeply unpopular) tenets of this new ideology. The most humorous example involved last night’s loser, Andrew Cuomo, who gave Donald Trump years of ammunition when in an attempt to clown the MAGA slogan he said America was “never that great.” Trump probably wouldn’t have won many of the crucial swing states last year had it not been for the “Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you” ad. Similarly, Trump’s relentless attacks on DEI – a radical re-think of civil rights ideas that substituted the organic quality of equality for the bureaucratic concept of “equity” – were highly successful, and for good reason. Even the preposterous attempts to explain Trump’s success as a reaction to “whiteness under threat,” uttered by the kind of people who didn’t see anything odd about the proliferation of “whiteness studies” classes at universities, put wind in Trump’s sails.
The 1990s version of the Democratic Party would have wasted no time in triangulating against such moronic intellectual excesses within its own voter base. In the 2010s and 2020s, however, it couldn’t afford to do that, for the obvious and sensible reason that they under-performed to a degree that made an intramural challenge like the 2016 Sanders run inevitable. Without Barack Obama’s decision to double down on George W. Bush’s 2008 bailout policies to save Wall Street, while selling out to the insurance and pharmaceutical industries in his much-ballyhooed grotesquerie of an attempt to fix this country’s health care system, the Democrats would never have lost control. They held off the first Sanders campaign in 2016, then squeaked though by a hair the second time in 2020 (employing some questionable back-room politics), but the stillborn Biden presidency was the last straw, making the beating they took last night a foregone conclusion.
LINK
Posted on 11/5/25 at 3:00 pm to goldennugget
quote:
I think a President AOC can absolutely happen if the GOP doesn't course correct
It has nothing to do with course correction it has everything to do with 40 to 45% of the population are absolute ignorant idiots and will never change they will vote democrat no matter what
It only really matters when the rest of the country is mobilized for a good cause and every place that has a radical will help mobilize in the national election
Posted on 11/5/25 at 3:01 pm to goldennugget
quote:
I think a President AOC can absolutely happen if the GOP doesn't course correct
This ^^^^ is why I get so frustrated with my fellow conservatives when they celebrate a significant win like Trump's re-election as the death knell of the Left. The Left is made up of relentless zombies who will give up at nothing until they have their way or until they are eradicated or involuntarily committed to a state mental asylum.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News