Commie Mandami and the 2028 Election
Started by BLADEMDA
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
“Tucker Carlson has directly addressed the topic, stating, "I'm not an anti-Semite because anti-Semitism is immoral. In my religion, it is immoral to hate people for how they were born, period”
So do you believe words?
Anti this. Anti that is thrown around just like the word narcissist.
He’s a media personality. He’s gonna to say stuff that gets ratings. He’s not out to be anyone’s friends. He’s out to make money.
So yeah. He’s hosted …Nick Fuentes, Darryl Cooper, and Candace Owens. All about Ratings.
It’s about ratings.
Just like the dude who died. Rush. Rush said crazy stuff about Jewish people
Is "it's about ratings" supposed to be some kind of defense for being a turd?
Is he not really a turd, because he's just "pretending" to be one? For ratings?
Is there a point at which pretending to be something, makes you that thing?
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Johan321
Full Member
Is this a bait?
Apart from hosting Nick Fuentes, and more importantly agreeing with him, Tucker has regularly promoted white replacement theories. How immigrants are destroying western civilization..
I don’t even engage with his content, and I know this.
If he says he isn't an anti-semite we have to believe him.
I love how a person can say ‘I believe all humans have a right to exist’ and be labeled an antisemite at the same time. Can we not conclude that antisemite simply no longer has meaning?
Israel is allowed to define the terms of the argument and continually, perpetually, ask the same dumb ‘don’t we have a right to exist?’ question. Starve Gazan children to death. Blow up buildings knowing they’re full of women and kids. Take southern Lebanon seconds into the start of a war. What, those people had no right to exist?
We obsess over China and Russia meddling in our elections, meanwhile AIPAC and affiliates toss $30mill to defeat Massie and they’re doing the same in other elections.
And even pointing stuff like this out gets one labeled ugly terms like antisemite.
All humans have a right to exist. That includes the Jewish people. It also includes Iranians. And Gazans. When someone says ‘Does Israel have a right to exist?’ what they’re really asking is ‘Is Israel allowed to do whatever it wants to whoever it wants whenever it wants?’
Israel is allowed to define the terms of the argument and continually, perpetually, ask the same dumb ‘don’t we have a right to exist?’ question. Starve Gazan children to death. Blow up buildings knowing they’re full of women and kids. Take southern Lebanon seconds into the start of a war. What, those people had no right to exist?
We obsess over China and Russia meddling in our elections, meanwhile AIPAC and affiliates toss $30mill to defeat Massie and they’re doing the same in other elections.
And even pointing stuff like this out gets one labeled ugly terms like antisemite.
All humans have a right to exist. That includes the Jewish people. It also includes Iranians. And Gazans. When someone says ‘Does Israel have a right to exist?’ what they’re really asking is ‘Is Israel allowed to do whatever it wants to whoever it wants whenever it wants?’
And if he says you can keep your healthcare. You gotta believe as well!
People will believe what they want to believe. I barely watch tv outside of sports.
I’m pretty much tone deaf what I heard on tv or even news media highlights.
Just remember whether the are politicians or talk show hosts. Their job is to get messages across. Whether you believe them or not. That’s up to you.
Well here is the problem.
You have groups of people, including citizens in the United States, using phrases like “from the river to the sea” and “globalize the intifada”. The context of which is critically important and exists on a spectrum from mere human rights protest slogans, calls for Palestinian freedom and equality, all the way to expressing the complete opposition to Israel’s existence as a state.
Israelis and Jews perceive it as threatening. This is happening in a a setting where political figures in the US want to divest from Israel, which MANY wonder is part of a larger effort to delegitimize Israel as a state. Oh and anti-Jewish hate crimes are at all time highs.
In that setting, it’s pretty freaking crystal clear what “does Israel have a right to exist” means. And it’s pretty simple to grasp where one stands with their answer.
Three Ds of antisemitism - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Well here is the problem.
You have groups of people, including citizens in the United States, using phrases like “from the river to the sea” and “globalize the intifada”. The context of which is critically important and exists on a spectrum from mere human rights protest slogans, calls for Palestinian freedom and equality, all the way to expressing the complete opposition to Israel’s existence as a state.
Israelis and Jews perceive it as threatening. This is happening in a a setting where political figures in the US want to divest from Israel, which MANY wonder is part of a larger effort to delegitimize Israel as a state. Oh and anti-Jewish hate crimes are at all time highs.
In that setting, it’s pretty freaking crystal clear what “does Israel have a right to exist” means. And it’s pretty simple to grasp where one stands with their answer.
Three Ds of antisemitism - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
All humans have a right to exist.
Johan321
Full Member
What is your view on current Israeli government? Do you not think that they are somewhat responsible for decline in their own global support?
Even if you don’t see the situation in Gaza as leftists do (genocide), how do you view the situation with Iran war?
Gas price to $5+/gallon? I guess I am going to drive my Tesla even more
www.nbcnews.com
Yemen’s Houthis declare naval blockade on Saudi Arabia, widening threat to global oil supplies
The Houthis said their decision to declare a maritime embargo was in response to what they called “an unjust and oppressive siege” imposed on Yemen by the Saudis.
www.nbcnews.com
Sure!
But let’s be clear, there is a big fat bold red line between “does Israel have a right to exist” (yes, Israel should continue to exist as a state); and “should the Israeli government be criticized and held accountable for their actions” (yes).
When politicians are talking, there should be no question as to the distinction between those two beliefs. Otherwise is to placate to the most extreme factions of the party, or worse, hold the belief themselves.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Johan321
Full Member
I think it’s a pretty loaded question. Why are Israeli supporters never asked, “Does Palestine have a right to exist? Does Lebanon have a right to exist? Does Iran have a right to exist?”, as Tucker rightfully points out. How come media is only obsessed with one nation’s right for existence?
Yes Israel has a right to exist like everything. But I don’t blame someone for being annoyed with this question. You go on a television or podcast to talk about your polices, and your vision for your state/ city. But instead, you spend half of your time debating this issue that is only a minor part of your actual job. It must be infuriating. Abdul El-Sayed has repeatedly said that “Because I love my Jewish American brothers and sisters, I want our tax dollars spent here in America, rather than going to bomb foreign nations.”
His position on this is clear as day. And yet, why is he asked the same question repeatedly? And let’s move on to Israeli government itself, and how we got here in the first place:
Miriam Adelson, along with her late husband has donated over $600 million to Trump campaigns in exchange for his support for Israel. Here are two clips where Trump openly admits this truth:
Larry Ellison, one of the richest persons on earth and a staunch Israeli supporter gave $45 million to Trump campaign. Not only that, he acquired CBS and appointed Bari Weiss (another staunch Zionist) as their head.
Let’s talk about race in Michigan. Abdul is being overspent 10:1. He has gone on every single podcast. He is hosting town halls everyday and meeting with Michiganders. His opponent on the other hand has near zero media presence. AIPAC has spent $50 million to get her elected. $50 million!!! She has zero ground game, and is just cruising on attack ads on her opponent funded by these super PACs.
Same thing happened in KY where $30 million were poured by AIPAC against arguably most conservative member of the entire republican party.
During a famous moment in NYC mayoral debate, candidates were asked which country they were planning on visiting once they become a mayor. Guess how it went down?
Do you see what is happening here? Do you think the US as a sovereign nation owes her unconditional support to any other nation? Because this is literally what is happening here. If Miriam Adelson had spent those $600 million building hospitals and colleges in Israel, no one would have cared. But instead she is using it to drag US in Israel’s forever wars..
Looking at all this, you can’t be telling me that Israel doesn’t have an unusual influence on our political leaders!
cittykat
Full Member
Some conservatives never stop freaking out. Some things never change.
Last edited:
Can we have Obama back except for his stances on abortion and gay marriage?Some conservatives never stop freaking out. Some things never change.
The deficit was < 600 bil when he left office.
Last edited:
There is a clear asymmetry of relevancy here. The progressive wing of the Democratic Party currently has key representatives and candidates endorsing the BDS movement, and/or endorsing a hardline anti-Zionist platform, and/or defending the October 7th attacks, and/or supporting the rhetoric or even participated in the protests featuring the chant “from the river to the sea”.
If candidates that have made statements endorsing the destruction of Gaza, or historically participated in rallies and protests condoning violence against Gazans, gain a foothold in the Republican Party it would become politically relevant to ask them if Palestine has a right to exist.
The media isnt obsessed with ONE nations right to exist, they are obsessed with the obfuscated quasi-answers to politically relevant questions. Questions on which the democratic party is currently divided and has to reconcile with the voters.
He has NEVER clearly answered the question. Lol his annoyance is self inflicted. His rhetoric contributes to the perceived polarization because it doesnt adequately separate criticism of Israeli policy from issues that are particularly sensitive to Jewish voters.
Well now you are trying to convince me influence=control of US policy. The problem with that is the longstanding BIPARTISAN policy continuity predates Netanyahu and modern lobbying practices by decades. They are a long term strategic ally with many shared political values. Even so, presidents have at times acted against the interests of Israel. However, if you are saying Trump is more malleable to Israeli influence than most, I won’t disagree.
On one side we have the absolute fringes of the progressive wing that believe crazy ideas like Palestine should be a free and independent nation and they act as such.
On the other side, your side apparently based on your postings, we have the war criminal leader of Israel, Netanyahu.
LOL. We have the fringe on one side, and the friggin leader of Israel and his crazy fellow right wingers, on the other side.
I’m sure you’ll miss the point. As you continue to obfuscate my point. Which is so glaringly simple. All humans have a right to exist. All humans. You keep trying to lump me in with leftist this or progressive that or that I’m missing something here or there.
Tell ya what. You do you. Whatever that is. Meanwhile, all humans have a right to exist. They do.
Last edited:
"Mayor Zohran Mamdani today announced "OPEN for Small Business", a package of more than 50 regulatory reforms to reduce the paperwork and bureaucratic burden facing the city's roughly 180,000 small businesses. Alongside an Executive Order that immediately implements several reforms, the package saves time, effort, and money for the small businesses that anchor New York's economy and the one million New Yorkers they employ...
The more than 50 reforms in OPEN touch nearly every type of small business in New York City, and break down as follows: 25 for food service and food retail businesses, seven for transportation businesses, five for other retailers, four for child care providers, three for industrial and commercial businesses, two for personal care businesses, three for nonprofits running bingo and games of chance licenses, and six that apply to every business in the city."
cittykat
Full Member
View attachment 422445
"Mayor Zohran Mamdani today announced "OPEN for Small Business", a package of more than 50 regulatory reforms to reduce the paperwork and bureaucratic burden facing the city's roughly 180,000 small businesses. Alongside an Executive Order that immediately implements several reforms, the package saves time, effort, and money for the small businesses that anchor New York's economy and the one million New Yorkers they employ...
The more than 50 reforms in OPEN touch nearly every type of small business in New York City, and break down as follows: 25 for food service and food retail businesses, seven for transportation businesses, five for other retailers, four for child care providers, three for industrial and commercial businesses, two for personal care businesses, three for nonprofits running bingo and games of chance licenses, and six that apply to every business in the city."
It’s too late 😢
Cozy Soup 'n' Burger closing after 54 years of feeding students, night owls, workers and wanderers
Every storefront has a story, and in New York City, even the most ordinary places can become something special, a neighborhood bodega, a pizza spot, a diner that's always there.
Gavin and Gretchen didn’t run because it was an abbreviated campaign and they didn’t want to take the loss. Kamala could take the loss. Bidens administration needed to groom some people for the next generation and no one - zero- should have let him think about running again for one second. January 22 should have started the succession plan and it wasn’t Kamala. I wish it was… I want a woman… but she isn’t it. Biden out her in charge is the border which was an f up. She was the fall girl that’s it…
Gavin has been campaigning quietly… he even came to my neck of the woods. I think everyone is waiting to see the midterms.
I’d prefer more moderate candidates like Shapiro or Andy beshear…. Andy isn’t a swing state tho and Josh is… at this early date I’d pick him as the candidate for the dems. The middle is cool… let’s get some moderates.
Personally I want to see a blue wave in the midterms and let the indictments begin
I’m here for it
Sometimes good leadership requires telling your most fervent supporters that what they want is
I don't think he will listen. He seems pretty determined.
Many people aren’t smart.
The commie nyc mayor makes some points how many innocent Muslims were killed by the Israel/USA backed Biden regime in their initial response.
Not sure if you watched the video.
He said he won't be arresting Bibi.
The demand from the Pro-Palestine crowd that the mayor of NYC should be arresting a foreign head of state for a crime the US federal government doesn't recognize is unrealistic and damaging to their cause.
That "commie" mayor is reducing government oversight and regulations for small businesses.
-shrug-
Last edited:
Bait and switch. Reducing govt oversight? Yeah right. By taxing secondary property. That’s too much govt oversight. It’s a tale of multiple personalities.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
The USA is very hypocritical of how it views Israel. Too many cookies in the jar what to do with Israel. And Israel is nothing without support from the USA. Despite what anyone says. We all know Israel would cease to exist without external help.
USA provides 70% of military infrastructure support for Israel.
Lol. "Bait and switch" for who? Small business owners? The reduction in regulations seems to be a positive step and was based on meetings he held with the small business community in the city.
Some of his policies don't fit the "commie" pejorative.
Some of his policies do fit the commie agenda.
He can do or try to do whatever he wants. If the people like him. The people have spoken
It's almost like you've got a state-of-the-art non sequitur machine hooked up to a random number generator sampling entropy from a wall of lava lamps, and it's somehow connected to your computer and left unattended.
As someone who wants the Mandami mania to stay in NYC, I would rather have the government provide free buses, cheap (free) groceries than taking a stake in INTEL and other private companies. The latter one is more akin to socialist policies to me than the former. But I guess nothing to see here if a republican does it.
We all would love that. But it’s gotta be a shared sacrifice
No one complains about social security because it’s a shared sacrifice. Rich and poor pay into it. We don’t like it. But we all pay into it.
Can’t nickel and dime people with Obamacare surtax
Or Medicare part b sur charge this etc
Those are the sure fire failures that’s not designed for long term revenue collections.
Are you serious? You have not been listening to republicans.
Targeted surcharges (like the ACA Net Investment Income Tax or Medicare Part B IRMAA surcharges) create arbitrary thresholds, phase-outs, and tax-planning incentives to avoid them.
Universal buy in like social security creates long term success.
As for republicans wanting to get rid of social security. This a negative. They want to raise the retirement age to 69/70. Remember the average death age in 1935 was …60/64 for men and women. Why do you think Congress put age 65 as social security age in 1935. Because social security was and should always be supplemental retirement income. While many will claim age 65 was not chosen due to the average age of death back in 1935. It’s certainly played some role
Robert Myers who died in 2010 help write the law. Said age 60 was too young and age 70 was too old” so they split the difference.
But Gingrich was right when he said we adopted social security when the average person died before they were old enough to get social security and that was rated as a fact.
Universal buy in like social security creates long term success.
As for republicans wanting to get rid of social security. This a negative. They want to raise the retirement age to 69/70. Remember the average death age in 1935 was …60/64 for men and women. Why do you think Congress put age 65 as social security age in 1935. Because social security was and should always be supplemental retirement income. While many will claim age 65 was not chosen due to the average age of death back in 1935. It’s certainly played some role
Robert Myers who died in 2010 help write the law. Said age 60 was too young and age 70 was too old” so they split the difference.
But Gingrich was right when he said we adopted social security when the average person died before they were old enough to get social security and that was rated as a fact.
Johan321
Full Member
Too many mentally unstable people with substance abuse problem and easy access to gun in this country. Combine that with irresponsible media that promotes conspiracies over accuracy for ratings.
You can feel the weight in those words. He is always out there in the public, walking miles on NY streets each day. Not the type who would hide in a building whole day surrounded by security.
You can feel the weight in those words. He is always out there in the public, walking miles on NY streets each day. Not the type who would hide in a building whole day surrounded by security.
Johan321
Full Member
“They want to raise the retirement age to 69/70”.
I don’t think either party is interested in doing that. While I personally agree that major reforms are needed to both Medicare, and social security (aim should be poverty reduction, not income replacement), implementing it would be a political death sentence.
Neither party is touching it with a 10 foot pole.
This is all true.
However, we should keep in mind that
1) the deal was different then for another important reason: non-government pensions were common. Around 1950 I think about 1/4 of privately employed workers in the USA had a pension associated with their job. By 1980 or so it was more like 2/3. Now it's something like 10%.
2) living longer doesn't also mean fit to work longer
If we're going to discuss raising the SS retirement age we've absolutely got to acknowledge that these 65-70 year olds aren't nearly as capable/productive as they were 10 years younger, and they don't have the same kind of pension cushion most Americans used to have.
too many mentally unstable people.... sometimes complicated by their self medication with drugs and/or alcohol.
mostly the fault of the ACLU and that no one wanted to pay for those institutions.
some people are just too crazy and we need to lock them up away from the normal people.
our government complicit with the drug dealers they like needs to stop. free narcan needs to stop. those people have chosen not to participate in life... just let them go. drug trade is likely responsible for most of the crime in this country. we need some hard solutions for drugs and mental illness in this country. hard.
and hard solutions for obesity and sedentary lifestyle and smoking and excess drinking. hard. but that will be less $ for everyone here and hospitals etc. so no one will go for hard solutions.
now none of you can call me a woke bleeding heart liberal
😎
agree with pgg- social security was invented so that most people wouldnt use it. also note that social securtiy rates were 2% (1 worker, 1 company) in 1937 when it started.... now its 12.4% (6.2% each).
also the percent of americans on SS was less than 2% in 1950.... now about 20%.
in 1945 the worker to beneficiary ratio was 41.9 workers to 1 receiver, now its 2.7 workers to one beneficiary.
the math isnt mathing...
probably will need a big influx of cash to keep it solvent - which will come from taxpayers. i sure do wish we hadnt spent billions on this idiocy in iran... could have spent that better.
Johan321
Full Member
I am mostly with you. Budget for schools keeps getting slashed, while there always seems to be more money available for the police. No money for NASA/ NIH, yet unlimited money for the military.
And what about guns? Safest places on earth are those where guns are banned. Dems have tried in the past to push for more regulations, but voters have only punished them, so they have pretty much given up now except in blue states.
On Social Security, only way to keep it solvent is focus on poverty reduction. So that would mean 65 years old with a net worth of $3 mill shouldn’t get any social security. But then it’s an impossible task to convince significant portion of the population that they will have to pay into the system, but they won’t get any direct benefits down the line. So, once again it’s a losing battle.
It’s a giant cluster ****.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Did yall see the New Hampshire university poll showing AOC in the lead for democratic presidential candidate 2028… in front of buttagieg and then mark kelly. This is how we end up with trumps- aoc and buttagieg will lose and lose big
Last edited:
Jon Ossoff or Andy Beshear will win the nomination.
Interesting that these were their respective high school nicknames...
Johan321
Full Member
What is needed is rank choice voting.
It would largely eliminate extremists on both sides, and favor center-left or center-right candidates.
Downside is status quo is maintained, and nothing significant gets done despite new challenges (lost jobs due to AI/ automation or effects of climate change).
It would largely eliminate extremists on both sides, and favor center-left or center-right candidates.
Downside is status quo is maintained, and nothing significant gets done despite new challenges (lost jobs due to AI/ automation or effects of climate change).
Wouldn’t be the worst idea. Might help shake up the two party system a bit.
