So now that Mamdami has won. Any predictions on how he will turn awful?
I don’t just mean that you disagree with some of his socialism lite proposals, and think free buses is the worst idea ever. Would anyone have predicted that a law and order, centrist Democrat like Adams would turn out to be a paid agent of Türkiye with corruption at all levels? I can’t remember what De Blasio did that made everyone hate him, and Giuliani mostly waited until he left office to go completely insane.
Point is, that NYC mayors seem to have this way of starting out popular, and then completely losing it.
That seems to happen to most Democrats. Mostly because they can’t accomplish the stuff they promised due to Republican interference. I predict the same will happen to Mamdani.
It doesn’t’ have to be from local Republican politicians. It could be interference from Trump, or the SCOTUS, or some other conservative / Republican federal judge, or even the police officers union / policeman benevolent association should NYPD reform be something on his list to accomplish.
Yes, he made some unpopular proposals that didn’t pass, and New Yorkers didn’t like that he spent the spring of 2020 running a doomed Presidential campaign instead of helping NYC deal with COVID.
Still, AFAICT his lasting legacy is that NYC now has free preschool for all, which IMO is a pretty damn good legacy to have.
I just wanted to inquire, as I’m not a NYC voter anymore, if Zohran Mamdani has the kind of charisma to rise fast enough to be a contender next year and in three years?
Like Obama, he’s dark-skinned and being smart isn’t a requirement anymore. And Obama didn’t have Trump tweeting about the Assemblyman then Senator from Illinois till the Birth Certificate thing.
A hundred years ago, Al Smith, an Assemblyman became Governor of New York yet as a the son of an Irish woman and an Italian man, he was given no chance [ to run for President ]. You needed Joseph Kennedy money to try.
Can he rise up to challenge the Shit Bomber for his 3rd term?
No, he will never be able to run for President, unless the Constitution is amended. One of the main requirements is to be a natural born citizen. He was born in Uganda to parents who were not citizens of the US at the time.
Some amendments are going to be ignored or re-interpreted, yet the natural born citizen requirement is not an amendment,
So he can be a thorn in Shit Bomber’s side. Everyone loved and respected Trump in the 80’s and 90’s (We absolutely did not). And hasn’t shit bomber moved to Florida?
You are correct it is not an amendment. I didn’t say or suggest that it was. It is in Article 2, section 1, clause 5.
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
Changing the citizenship from birth requirement can ONLY be changed by an amendment to the Constitution.
No matter how you look at it Mamdani does not meet them. I’m not really sure what you meant in your response to what I posted.
There’s a bunch of indictments in either NYC town or state and Trump loves tweeting at female governors and dark skinned politicians so I was thinking it would be good if he spent a lot of his time beating on New York (besides animatedly dumping shit on broadway and considering it funny).
Trump threatened to withhold funds from NYC if they elected a communist. Let’s raise the hammer & sickle!
Rats, I thought he lost big in the primaries, not the general (444 vs 87, vs Hoover)
Though reading up, I see there were 103 ballots in the primaries. Strong support from the Northeast, yet he only went on to win won Rhode Island and Massachusetts, and states in the deep south way back when the Democrats could win them in the general election.
Being Irish and Catholic, whether Hoover and the GOP used that (I know to some extent Nixon did in 1960), and the notion that a Catholic President would heed the orders of the Pope was still an issue in 1960. In those deep South states, I reckon it still would matter to voters. ETA: I’ll never say it’s automatic a candidate wins his (or her) home state.
Yet the economy was good, which one no longer associates with Hoover anymore. And Smith was against prohibition.
I guess the one place I was right is that it would take Joseph Kennedy money to beat a popular enough sitting VP (Nixon did win twice later on).
I did and missed the edit window to correct that, and that it was the 1924 convention with 103 ballots between him and William McAdoo and the Democrats, after 16 days, picked a dark horse, Davis, who lost to Coolidge - again in prosperous times.
Sorry for the thtreadjack & mis-info about Smith in Mamdami’s thread. We’ll see if trump follows through with his threats about pulling funding if NYC elects a “communist”