this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2026
244 points (100.0% liked)

politics

30202 readers
3116 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Mayors such as New York’s Zohran Mamdani show leftwing ideology can go hand-in-hand with effective governance

A trio of Democratic socialist victories in mayoral contests in three of the largest cities in the US has unleashed a new wave of hope on the left of the party. Zohran Mamdani and Katie Wilson took office in New York and Seattle, respectively, this year. Janeese Lewis George is set to follow in Washington DC.

As momentum around leftwing candidates appears to build, focus will turn to Los Angeles over the coming months, where another member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) will attempt to continue this winning streak.

The common criticism of democratic socialism is that its proponents put their ideological interests before matters of effective governance. But after a string of high-profile wins, supporters are hopeful that Mamdani and others will prove the two can go hand-in-hand.

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 2 points 28 minutes ago

Who knew that actually doing the job and serving the people that elected you would result in a positive results?!

[–] NM_Gringo@lemmy.world 31 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

It's not just messaging, they really are getting stuff done.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 16 points 2 hours ago

How despicable of them! They're just doing that to make honest, hard-working oligarchy patsies look bad.

[–] Bakkoda@lemmy.world 13 points 3 hours ago

Meanwhile Jeffries is literally on record stating he's fighting for the Democratic party.

Not American people. Not his constituents. "His" party.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 29 points 5 hours ago

Jeffries and Schumer are shitting down the sides of their legs over the prospect of Democrats possibly doing anything useful for Americans.

[–] Foni@piefed.zip 23 points 5 hours ago (5 children)

As a European, I will never understand how, having primary elections, this hasn't happened decades ago.

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 5 points 1 hour ago

Education.

Corrupt politicians siphon money away from public education to create an manipulatable class to consume their propaganda.

They own all of the means of communication, so they make sure everyone is consuming, by and large, the same shit.

They hedge the bet that enough people are dumb enough to keep listening to them.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 8 points 2 hours ago

Because the wealthy used their capital to seize the means of democracy. The same thing is happening across every liberal "democracy", with varying degrees of success.

[–] Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip 12 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

There is lots of money in politics here in capitalism land, and unfortunately propaganda works. It very much works :(

[–] laranis@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 hours ago

It works so fucking much.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 22 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

It's because most Primaries are carefully controlled by the party leaders. Yes, there are requirements that are open and technically anyone with the correct paperwork/signatures/whatever else can run. But the people who control the two major parties locally have a lot of influence, and can make the job easier for theor preferred candidates.

Combine this with a dynamic where most general elections are already decided for one party or another, and this means the general election is basically a formality. In Congressional elections, you have gerrymandering that ensures that districts are drawn to drive certain results. But even in these Mayoral elections, you have the same problem because Republicans have abandoned the cities, and most cities here lean Democratic.

You might ask about third parties, but our FPTP system screws them over, too. There is just enough influence from the minority party to mean that a third-party bid that takes 25% of the vote might just hand the election to the minority major party, making all that effort on the part of the 3rd party counterproductive.

Our 2 party system is not formalized in any document. It is a result of how our electoral systems are structured. But that makes it even harder to reform, because we have to reform lots of little things (and a few big things) all at once.

[–] justaman123@lemmy.world 1 points 31 minutes ago

The Republicans didn't abandon cities so much as living in cities require living with rules that are made to make things better for everyone. This requires governing. The Republicans didn't abandon cities, they abandoned governing.

[–] Alatarius@lemmy.dbzer0.com -3 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (2 children)

Because most larger elections are decided by the Electoral College. Which is separate from the popular vote, yet holds more power/sway for a candidate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Electoral_College

[–] synae@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 12 minutes ago

Electoral college is only for the prez/vp ticket

[–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 13 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

The has nothing to do with these local races and the reason why it hasn't happened more often is exactly what happened during mamdani's run; dems undermined him at every turn and republicans pushed support for his opponents. The uniparty threw everything they had at him, and normally that works.

Like with the Platner controversies, it sort of seems like people are wising up to the bullshit and voting for the candidate anyways, against the wishes and efforts of the party. Normally that amount of coordinated repression has a significant effect. The ad money alone is normally enough to bury a campaign; sprinkle a hint of scandal and most up-and-coming campaigns fail. For some reason, now, it's just not working

[–] justaman123@lemmy.world 1 points 30 minutes ago

Yeah I guess they figure that the scandals don't matter for Trump so they may as well not matter for the guy that's gonna do good stuff for them

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

... that the people want done.