You really like thinking of yourself as a “normie”, don’t you?
No, I’m very political, I’m a hardcore Liberal, I certainly wouldn’t consider myself a “normie” politically. I think political normies are people like my mother-in-law or some of the aforementioned moms in my wife’s fitness group and their spouses, people who barely spend any time at all thinking about politics.
I don’t think anyone who posts about politics on a message board can be a normie in that context, almost definitionally.
What on Earth is he talking about? Genuine question. When I hear Momdani, or Buttegeig, or Tammy Baldwin talk – or read the party platform – I don’t see arrogance. (Even Schumer might be misguided, but arrogant?).
I really would like to know what he means by this, and where he gets his information.
He didn’t mean Mamdani. We were talking mostly about Schumer, Jeffries, etc. A lot of it involved being upset at how willing they were to support Cuomo over the “scary Muslim” Mamdani.
A lot of it had to do with how their messaging was so iron-locked on egg prices and such, without even bringing in all the horrors such as neighborhood kidnappings into the conversation at all. Our “kitchen table” talk doesn’t resemble the imaginary kitchens and people talking in them that the Dems are reaching out toward.
Also, My cousin works with the police in a place with Democrats in charge at the municiple level, and he has opinions about it.
OK, I can buy that, but I think there’s a lot more variation in what would be considered “normie” around the country, and none of us are going to be able to extrapolate well enough out of our own experience to get the sense of the whole.
And the Democrats have decided not to publish their post-election analysis, so we don’t really have good data to go on, either.
…can you cite where Hakeem Jeffries or Chuck Schumer indicated or implied in any way, shape, or form that they were supporting Cuomo over Mamdani because he is a “scary Muslim”?
Did they even support Cuomo over Mamdani at all, or is he just butthurt that they didn’t give Mamdani a fawning endorsement?
Do any of your friend’s concerns have anything at all to do with reality, or are they this delusional across the board?
No thanks, I’m not going to argue someone else’s position by proxy. It isn’t fair to you or to him – or to me, most importantly.
You don’ have to agree with him. But it struck me, hearing that from him, because he isn’t a fringe guy. Pretty “normie” by Seattle standards.
Caveat: I have no idea who @Frilly_Heck’s cousin is or what he’s thinking. And I agree with you that the three politicians you named—Mamdani, Buttegieg and Baldwin—aren’t projecting significant “mainstream Democratic establishment arrogance towards leftists” affect.
But I think such mainstream-Democratic-establishment attitudes have arguably been an issue for a lot of the more lefty Democrats and democratic socialists and others who typically vote Democratic. In particular, a lot of Gaza war opponents were very disillusioned about Democrats’ lack of responsiveness in pushing for a ceasefire in Gaza.
Nowadays I think there would be more of a rapprochement between politicians and public on that issue. But back in 2024, while support for Israel among rank-and-file Democrats was dropping like a rock in response to the Gaza slaughter, the Democratic leadership was still all in on continuing to supply weapons and refusing to press for a ceasefire, and so on. As a December 2024 NPR interviewee observed about the election results:
I see that @Frilly_Heck has supplied more details, and yeah, I agree that there’s a large, although possibly no longer dominant, segment of the Democratic Party establishment that is scared to reach out to more progressive voters on crucial issues like ICE abuses, LGBTQ rights, worker protections, reproductive rights, etc. They still think that “Clintonian” anti-left-wing “centrism” is the way to skim off voters from the Republicans, and nowadays I doubt that they’re right about that. If that’s what NY Democrats wanted, for example, they’d have elected Cuomo over Mamdani.
And when mainstream Democrats are still giving that vibe of “you unwashed-hippie types need to sit down and shut up and let us experienced professional politicians drive the bus”, and losing elections because of it, yeah, that can come across as arrogant.
What worked in one of the single bluest cities in the country against the weakest candidates I’ve ever seen is not a good strategy for the nation as a whole. But we will probably need to get completely clobbered at least a few times before we understand this.
I dunno, i think a lot of people want a populist. I think Trump won mostly because he was able to present himself as a populist. Yes, the far left and the far right have things in common. But they differ on a lot of critical issues. Like oppressing LGBTQ people, which happens to be near and dear to me. Like social services. I’d like to see Medicaid expanded, not contracted. Like women’s rights.
Maybe. But if that’s where we’re headed, then this country is fucked. As a Jewish person, I don’t trust populism. I’ve seen where it leads. And if the Democratic party falls to Left Populism, then we are in Weimar.
…until they decide that being LGBT is a form of corrupting bourgeoisie decadence, sure. I don’t trust the left populists to stick by LGBT rights any more than I trust them to protect Jews.
I just want you to know that if that scenario comes true, there will be leftists fighting against it. You don’t have to like them in advance for it, or at all (or vice versa). But you will not be alone.
That’s great for them - I’m sure some of the “After Hitler, Us” crowd of Leftists also fought back, once they were on the way to the Camps. Doesn’t change the fact that they greatly contributed to getting Germany to that point to begin with.
thorny you have said so much better and more concisely then my flailing attempt. Tip of the hat to you.
I understand your fear. It’s a valid fear. And I have sympathy for the position you are in, which isn’t fun. I also know that no one on a message board is going to convince you of anything.
And also, your fear is, frankly, quite similar to the fears expressed about Trump, which are being dismissed as “hysterical” in this thread.
@Kimstu and @Frilly_Heck, thanks. I see what Simon was referring to now, and I sympathize, to a point. I might characterize it more as “dismissiveness,” but I can see how “arrogance” may play into it. It’s the same old tension as always, but it does wax and wane, and I feel (no cites) that we’re entering a period of relative rapprochement between the more-progressive and less-progressive wings – with the more-progressive side achieving a few electoral victories (like Mamdani), while also showing a pragmatic “getting clean for Gene” attitude, supporting folks like Pritzker, Gallego, Klobuchar, and Kim.
(Surely some of this rapprochement stems from realizing how truly horrific the Trumpenyahu presidency has been for Palestinians…not that this excuses mainstream Democrats from their wishy-washiness circa 2024).
FYI, Gallego is my Senator, and he is a major source of unhappiness right now, because he’s part of the concerning trend towards misogyny in the Democrats.
Again, I have already posted this, but I guess it bears a repeat:
https://people.com/ruben-gallego-groans-about-democrats-leaked-texts-11857626
I think most people find the n-word offensive. That’s not the case with hysteria or hysterical.
Here’s an interesting fact. The words hysteria and hysterical have been used in over fifty posts in dozens of different threads since I started this thread. They’ve even appeared in other thread titles. All without provoking any protest.
The problem with using the word hysteria apparently exists mainly in this thread.
I said in the OP that Trump and the Republicans are illegally arresting people and gutting civil rights. These are terrible things that are actually happening. So it’s not at all hysterical to protest against these things.