this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2025
394 points (98.5% liked)

politics

25340 readers
2497 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Politico reports that at a Hamptons fundraiser last Saturday, Cuomo told his well-heeled supporters that, contrary to all available evidence, he could win the New York mayoral race as an independent—because he was likely to have the implicit support of President Donald Trump.

The imperative of defeating Mamdani justified the new coalition Cuomo is trying to create of his die-hard loyalists (who are Democrats) with Trump Republicans.

Some of that latter group might be tempted to back Curtis Sliwa, the actual GOP nominee in the race. Cuomo told these donors, “We can minimize [the Sliwa] vote, because he’ll never be a serious candidate. And Trump himself, as well as top Republicans, will say the goal is to stop Mamdani. And you’ll be wasting your vote on Sliwa.” Cuomo went on to emphasize that he’d be a mayor who could find common ground with Trump:

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 32 minutes ago
[–] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Man, the comments here leave me with no hope that any lesson was learned at all this past election. It seems as if many here are positioned to do the exact same thing in 2028 as they did in 2024:

Which was nothing.

Let’s maybe break this down in a way it may be more easily digested by those that seem to still not understand how it works:

Let’s say MAGA is a cancer. I’m certain very few would argue about this (I’m not thrilled by the idea of likening it to such a disease, but bear with me- it works). And we all know that the more aggressive the cancer, the more aggressive the treatments are needed to be to overcome it.

Democrats are chemotherapy. Yes it sucks. They suck. But as it is a proven treatment in the battle against cancer, they are proven capable of defeating the cancer that is MAGA. Hell… they did it with Biden, and that dude’s bones are rarely enough to prop him up.

To add- Do we see many people choosing to undergo a rigorous chemo therapy session if they don’t have cancer? No? Maybe because they enjoy it? Still no?

Yeah, that’s because no one wants chemo if they do t have to have it- but until a more successful treatment for the disease is readily available- we have to go with chemo. No one is happy with how the democrats handle things, but right now, it’s what we have- no, it’s ALL we have. So we go with that. Because there is no other viable option- regardless of your wishful thinking, in reality- no, THERE IS NO VIABLE THIRD OPTION. understand this.

Back to the cancerous stain on America that is the Trump administration-

We also don’t ever have oncologists suggest that with an aggressive cancer such as MAGA- doing nothing at all is the best course of action. EVER. Not do we have them suggest that we should use antibiotics (the equivalent of third part voting).

Once the cancer is on its way out and kicking rocks, we can then stop the chemo and work towards the necessary steps to a healthy and cancer free body.

NOT BEFORE.

Now, I’m full well prepared to have this analogy torn apart and rewritten to make some bizarro-world version of a point against it, but no matter how you look at it-

this cancer was assisted by those that chose to not go after it when we had the chance.

(Disclaimer: my apologies if this example strikes a nerve with anyone. I too have also lost many family members to this disease. Colon cancer, breast cancer, skin cancer and lung cancer. It in no way is being made light of- but instead, being used as a placeholder to illustrate that the one thing that can win against the one thing we all hate, is also something we all hate- but the casualties in the end will be exponentially less)

[–] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 6 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I think that your point has gotten a bit lost in the analogy for me. Like if we're saying that the Democrats are like chemotherapy — unpleasant but necessary — in your view, what does this mean for the potential split caused by Mamdani winning the nomination and many establishment Dems seeming to have a problem with this? You seem frustrated at some of the comments in this thread, but it's not clear to me what your issue is in particular, or what you think is the best course of action with respect to the upcoming mayoral election.

For what it's worth, I like your analogy, and how you frame it; I think that with some refinement or clarification, it could be an effective way to deliver your point

[–] MourningDove@lemmy.zip -4 points 2 hours ago

In my view and my analogy, what is happening with Mamdani really helps to exemplify my point:

Chemo is the essentially the carpet-bombing of cancer treatment. Unfortunately it’s going to take out some of the good guys also. Not unlike how antibiotics work. There’s no discrimination. It takes out ALL bacteria.

[–] joan@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Hello? This actually is great news! Due to the first past the post voting system, now the fascists will be split in two and have no chance of winning!!

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

https://www.vote.nyc/RankedChoiceVoting

NYC uses RCV for mayoral elections. he just doesn’t know how it works, or he’s intentionally being misleading to get fundraising

load more comments
view more: next ›