Og help us if we get management that identifies with the footsoldiers, why, they could care about something other than the quarterly stock price trend.
Arizona special election primary roiled by Democratic debates over age, experience and legacy
I’ve been seeing folks try to spin Adelita Grijalva’s primary win into being some kind of “refutation” of the NYC primary results, as this article mentions. As an Arizonan, I want to make it clear that this is a bad comparison framework. They are very dissimilar elections.
Deja Foxx was also a “dark horse” young candidate, but that’s about where the similarity ends. While a lot of us were grumbling a bit about the dynastic tendencies that go with a Grijalva vote, she is (and always has been) an active part of the Tucson community, genuinely likes Southern Arizona, has pretty progressive policies herself, and perhaps most importantly, is not a sex pest or negligent elderly person death-causer.
ETA: If there is a general conclusion for Democrats to draw from this, I’d say it’s “If you’re going to run legacy candidates, make sure they are not sex pesty negligent creeps before you worry about how moderate/progressive they are.”
There is no “wrong box”. In America, you self identify.
But other than that, yeah. This is not even a tempest in a teapot, it is s mild wind in a teaspoon.
Right- of his list, a few were bad idea and the rest pretty decent. Discuss his policies and opinions,
To claim you know what race someone is (unless they are your own child or you are going by what they self- identify) is a form of racism.
Honestly, when I see “scandals” like this, it tends to incline me towards the candidate. Because if that’s the worst thing that the opposition muck-rackers can dig up, well, that guy must be awfully squeaky-clean.
Other than him being an evil-socialist-communist-mooslim. Because that’s really what’s at the bottom of all this nonsense.
Yep.
You forget- “not white”.
Not white indeed, and very much the wrong sort of black apparently.
…this is such an important, relevant and salient point I will immediately update what I wrote. We must have accuracy.
- And the third candidate… :: checks notes :: ticked
the wronga box on a form when he was seventeen.
Is that better?
Although I’d argue that “self-identify” depends. You’ve got “blood quantum” laws in some places that we don’t have here. And I’m not sure what the status of gender identity is now in many places in America.
But in this case? Mamdani certainly ticked a box.
Yes, but I really liked your post overall, mine was a small quibble.
I doubt this will even be mentioned as it gets closer to the election. It’s currently a post primary lull. No TV ads being run yet. Lots of money was spent during the primary. Probably waiting until August to start pushing again.
…all good. Apologies if that came across as a tad snarky.
Nope, I appreciate it- and your earlier post. We’re good.
On a lighter note, Mr. Mamdani apparently got a huge pop when he stepped on stage at a Wu-Tang concert recently. So if you’re against Zohran, you’re against the Wi-Tang Clan, and Wu-Tang is, as I understand it, for the children. So pick your side. 
Unfortunately for him children don’t vote.
Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL attacks Mamdani but gets his facts totally wrong. What happened to the ADL? It used to be a force for decency. Now it’s just a force for right wing lies.
That’s not a past discrimination problem. That’s a current discrimination problem. And they aren’t discriminating on the basis of race, but on class and by nepotism. Yes, it’s perpetuating racial inequalities, but white candidates who aren’t related to board members (surely the vast majority) are also not getting an internship, and from your description, white store employees are equally shut out of corporate jobs. If you try to address it as though it’s racial discrimination, the problem isn’t going to get fixed - we can already see what happens: you get one black intern alongside all the interns chosen by nepotism.
I cannot understand the desire to frame class discrimination as racial discrimination. It not only means failing to address some genuine wrongs, it’s also shooting yourself in the foot by making your policies less popular with a group that comprises a fairly large number of voters.
Yup, we need to cater to the fairly large class of people who want to put white people in good jobs, black people in prison and brown people in bad jobs. Got it. That’s the winning ticket.
In your post you described rampant nepotism, and discrimination against anyone who doesn’t have parents rich enough to put them through college and pay for overseas volunteering trips into the bargain. Don’t you think those are bad and should be changed regardless of the races involved?
It’s not much of a result if you go from a society where most people don’t have a chance to advance and the 1% is white, to a society where most people don’t have a chance to advance and the 1% is racially balanced.
Unusually, I find myself in complete agreement with DemonTree here.
We’ve “succeeded” in eliminating racism, to the extent that extraordinarily talented minorities no longer face insurmountable boundaries to social advancement, so that we can all benefit from their talents.
But the ultimate goal is that stupid and lazy Black people should be doing as well, on average, as stupid and lazy white people. That’s going to require looking at nepotism and class privilege.
Not really. “Jonathan Greenblatt, the Anti-Defamation League CEO, sharply criticized Zohran Mamdani in a TV appearance on Monday for his refusal to outright condemn the “globalize the intifada” slogan. The ADL chief also wrongly claimed that the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor hasn’t visited a single synagogue or any Jewish institutions during the campaign.”
The first fact is correct. The second is sorta correct- “A spokesperson for the ADL said, “Jonathan was talking about engagement after the primary, when voters now have their options before them and it matters most. To our knowledge, the candidate hasn’t gone to a mainstream synagogue or Jewish organization since the primary ended.” Yes, a quibble answer, but it could explain the mistake.
So I rate the claim of “facts totally wrong” as half true.