• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

GK86

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,832

Caban is at 39.6%, Katz with 38.3%.

Link.

Tiffany Cabán, the 31-year-old public defender endorsed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is on the verge of a stunning upset in a Queens district attorney's race that could dramatically impact the direction of criminal justice reform in America.

With 98 percent of the vote reporting, Cabán held a razor thin 1,229 vote lead over Melinda Katz, the borough president backed by the same Queens Democratic machine that Ocasio-Cortez crushed one year ago. Katz has refused to concede, waiting for absentee votes to be counted.
Cabán's startling performance may not only redefine criminal justice reform but also New York's once ossified, hierarchical political scene. Bold leftists are ascendant, with groups like the Democratic Socialists of America evolving from a curiosity to a preeminent vote-getting force in the city.


"When we started this thing, they said I was too young. They said I didn't look like a district attorney," Cabán said Tuesday at her raucous election night party. "They said we could not build a movement form the grassroots. They said we could not win. But we did it, y'all."

"I am a 31-year-old, queer Latina public defender whose parents grew up in the Woodside Housing projects," she continued. "And I decided to run. I ran because for too long, too many communities in Queens hadn't had a fair shot in our criminal justice system."

Cabán's platform was unapologetically progressive in a borough that was once defined by Archie Bunker, the irascible conservative of "All in the Family" fame. Cabán campaigned as a "decarceral" prosecutor, promising to oppose the construction of new jails, ending cash bail, decriminalize sex work, and put far less people in prison. Richard Brown, the longtime Queens DA who died in May, was her polar opposite, a tough-on-crime ex-judge who continued to prosecute low-level offenses like turnstile hopping and refused to set up an internal unit to review wrongful convictions.

Queens is county of over 2 million people, big enough to be one of the five largest cities in America. Brown held the office since 1991. A competitive election for the incredibly powerful post had not been waged in over a half century.

Katz's platform would come to mirror Cabán's, though her campaign invested in a bevy of TV and digital ads portraying the young public defender as an out-of-touch radical. One Facebook ad even targeted Cabán for playing basketball with voters in the predominately black neighborhood of Jamaica.

Even if Katz somehow survives, the old guard of New York politics has suffered significant damage. Crowley's loss last year stunned the Democratic establishment. This time, many of them were mobilizing to avoid a repeat. A new party boss, Representative Gregory Meeks, took over from Crowley, and Governor Andrew Cuomo threw his full weight behind Katz.

It took Ocasio-Cortez to drive once machine-friendly politicians into Cabán's camp, like the deputy leader of the State Senate, Michael Gianaris. More Democratic power brokers in New York are likely to cozy up to democratic socialists in the future. In a city that once re-elected Republicans like Rudy Giuliani, the political shift is palpable—in one generation, unabashed leftists are set to rule.

Link.

There were about 1,200 votes between them.

Whoever wins is poised to become the first female Queens DA.

There are about 3,400 uncounted paper ballots — including affidavit, absentee and military— and they can't be tallied until July 3, according to the Board of Elections.






 

Brazil

Actual Brazilian
Member
Oct 24, 2017
18,447
São Paulo, Brazil
This is such a big win. Very happy for Queens residents.

A leftist public defender is the best person you could wish for in the DA's office.
 

sangreal

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,890
How is someone endorsed by some of the biggest names in elected officials (including local machine politicians) running against the establishment?
 

effingvic

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,313
Really happy for her and Queens. Is there a chance of her losing after the uncounted ballots come in?
 
Jun 20, 2019
2,638
This is really good news! I've been following the decarceral movement, I think it's a great step toward reducing harm from the criminal justice system.
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
This is an exciting race. Looks like the Left has gained momentum in Queens, to an impressive degree. Both candidates look great, and congratulations for wherever wins to be the first female DA in Queens.
 

sangreal

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,890
Depends on where the money comes from, largely. And a lot of those "big names" have been notably marked as "insurgents" of the dem party.

Sure, every politician calls themselves an outsider (or I guess insurgent in today's nomenclature) because it is politically convenient. They aren't though. I'll give you that the weight of the political machine/unions wasn't behind her
 

Deleted member 7130

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,685
Sure, every politician calls themselves an outsider (or I guess insurgent in today's nomenclature) because it is politically convenient. They aren't though. I'll give you that the weight of the political machine/unions wasn't behind her
They've been referred to as such by media and have been counted out or differentiated as unruly or even unwanted members of the party by other members who have served many terms and operated in a fashion that tow's the party's middle of the road agenda of austerity. Many "insurgents" now, like AOC, are there because they had the means to primary democratic incumbents. Then the party turned around and black listed agencies that work against democratic incumbents... if that's not a clear message of who's considered a real establishment team player, I don't know what is. The "establishment" isn't just incumbency of people, it's also incumbency of status quo policies that enable corporate rule, unchecked concentration of wealth, and growing class inequality. Those still largely remain the normal order of business by the remainder of the dem party.
 

Nacho

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,128
NYC
She got my vote, happy to hear she managed to pull the upset. Katz would have been a huge improvement, but she's ultimately more of the same shitty politician who's just following political winds in order to keep having a job.
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
They've been referred to as such by media and have been counted out or differentiated as unruly or even unwanted members of the party by other members who have served many terms and operated in a fashion that tow's the party's middle of the road agenda of austerity. Many "insurgents" now, like AOC, are there because they had the means to primary democratic incumbents. Then the party turned around and black listed agencies that work against democratic incumbents... if that's not a clear message of who's considered a real establishment team player, I don't know what is. The "establishment" isn't just incumbency of people, it's also incumbency of status quo policies that enable corporate rule, unchecked concentration of wealth, and growing class inequality. Those still largely remain the normal order of business by the remainder of the dem party.

Why wouldn't you call AOC's faction insurgents? That's the entire point of their getting elected, to shake things up and replace the old guard. The old guard know how to stay elected, it's difficult to change anything when you're not in office - basic survival instincts in the political realm. It's one of the weaknesses the JD's have, and not all of them can have the popularity of AOC to thrive in those conditions. The party didn't engage in those restrictions on a whim (they could have done them as soon as the JD's we're sworn in were they inclined but they didn't), they did it because they'd been hassled by the JD's for months and months and finally put their foot down, which the JD's should have seen coming and accounted for, because they weren't going to anger leadership indefinitely without reprisals. You'd get that in any top down organisation with strong leadership. They were warned repeatedly from people in the party, who were trying to save them from this fate, but this went unheeded. It's fine to be the rebels of the party, leadership does need to be reminded to take risks but the JD's overplayed their hand and the predictable thing happened to everyone who understood how leadership worked.

Leadership comes with responsibilities, which are not to be taken lightly. You want a national party with the strength to take on the GOP and win presidencies and congresses, that comes with working with wealthy donors and compromise to keep the state running so reforms can be made. Don't act like the Dems were ever given the powers by voters to get the most done through congress, nobody ever gave them 2/3rd's of the House or Senate. The JD's haven't proven they're unable to get those results, either. To date they get crushed more often than not against the establishment's candidates and their relationship's with progressives outside their group is mixed at best - which is why some of those flip to the establishment's groups in congress instead.
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2017
557

You get elected to pass legislation that will materially change people's lives for the better, not to glad hand your donors and focus on the next election to stay in power with a nebulous neoliberal agenda that is just empty guff. The socialists work and vote to bring about actual changes, and if they can't, they are not scared to name and shame the obstacles both outside and inside the party (which couldn't give two flying fucks about either governing or the working class).
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
You get elected to pass legislation that will materially change people's lives for the better, not to glad hand your donors and focus on the next election to stay in power with a nebulous neoliberal agenda that is just empty guff. The socialists work and vote to bring about actual changes, and if they can't, they are not scared to name and shame the obstacles both outside and inside the party (which couldn't give two flying fucks about either governing or the working class).

Socialists can't change anything when their operations are crippled by the establishment and they can't get elected in the numbers to matter. The other factions have passed legislation and executive orders which have helped millions - because there is no easy path to shaping the country politically like you want. The socialists haven't done 1/10th of why changes they want to mae because they failed to be in the right places or to get the right numbers to get the job done. As I explained about, this applies to the establishment, as well. Give them congress so they can do things properly and things happen, when they don't don't be surprised when they end up settling because their voters failed to show up at the voting booth when it mattered. As well as the fact the Democrats are a coalition, and without that each group may as well be the irrrelevant as the Green's.

The problem isn't that they're not shaming their enemies, its that they don't have the capability to act on that. They shine the spotlight, they don't shut things down on either political party. Influence is not power, that's why Pelosi is calling the shots and not AOC.
 
Oct 27, 2017
557

If you are blocked by the system and establishment, then you use your motivated base to change things. Obama had a chance to have 10 million people march on washington and make his policies heard, but in a precursor to his naivety, he just rolled his entire base into the DCCC system and deflated the entire momentum.
No democratic candidate, if elected, will get anything accomplished as president after 2020. They will all be blocked by the senate, the supreme court, and the federal courts. But only Sanders will both:
Point that out
-and-
Mobilize people to fight it all and create a movement that works outside of electoralism.
 

Verelios

Member
Oct 26, 2017
14,878
Yeah, it's been pretty crazy over here but it's great knowing that someone could wake up one day and just decide they want shit to change...and then do it.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
The NY State primary setup built to deliberately depress turnout in order to let organized labor steamroll elections in an organized machine is completely backfiring on them in the modern post-union base world.
If you are blocked by the system and establishment, then you use your motivated base to change things. Obama had a chance to have 10 million people march on washington and make his policies heard, but in a precursor to his naivety, he just rolled his entire base into the DCCC system and deflated the entire momentum.
No democratic candidate, if elected, will get anything accomplished as president after 2020. They will all be blocked by the senate, the supreme court, and the federal courts. But only Sanders will both:
Point that out
-and-
Mobilize people to fight it all and create a movement that works outside of electoralism.
There was no uptick in turnout in 2016. The revolution did not materialize then, and it won't materialize in the future.
 

Luminish

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,508
Denver
The thing is, this isn't just a Queens trend, though Queens has certainly gone the farthest. Larry Krasner in Philadelphia basically counts as anti-incarceratial too and was elected in 2018. I think the left has given him a lot of leeway so far because it's hard to know what is reasonably expected, so more examples is going to be really helpful.

I've heard good things about Rachael Rollins & Andrea Harrington in MA too.
 

Deleted member 14459

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,874
How is someone endorsed by some of the biggest names in elected officials (including local machine politicians) running against the establishment?

Because as you probably know, based on your avatar, NY establishment politics is very particular and very oppressive of those coming from outside of its corrupt primary machine...
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
If you are blocked by the system and establishment, then you use your motivated base to change things. Obama had a chance to have 10 million people march on washington and make his policies heard, but in a precursor to his naivety, he just rolled his entire base into the DCCC system and deflated the entire momentum.
No democratic candidate, if elected, will get anything accomplished as president after 2020. They will all be blocked by the senate, the supreme court, and the federal courts. But only Sanders will both:
Point that out
-and-
Mobilize people to fight it all and create a movement that works outside of electoralism.

You did all this for 20+ years, and all you got was 7 people elected in the House in safe districts and a failed POTUS candidate who needed the entire field cleared by Hillary to stand a chance. It's telling in your response that you're not engaging with the details of my argument that your movement is as strong as you think it is. I know all of that, it's boiler plate activist speak but we're not talking about activism we're talking about making real change, which requires working within the system itself. That's not going to count for shit, either, when you don't have money to back your candidates, the media on their side or establishment rival candidates underestimating leftists like Crowley did.

They certainly don't if you don't fight back properly, what are the JD's doing about the Senate races? What are their plans to do about the courts? What are they don't to get the establishment on board with their plans and to fill in the weaknesses the establishment missed? What are they going to do to break that cycle?

Your Bernie argument is flawed. It posits that he's the only leftist politician in the country who can accomplish this feat and omits the fact he's never shown to do this. He couldn't even beat Hillary Clinton head to head. He's created a moment, it didn't do 1/10th of that, it might be decades before it'll be ready to do anything like that. He should have done this 20 years ago, when we had time to combat climate change, by now the movement might have have grown to the right size to make actual change we need.

What's missing is that your solely focused on getting candidates elected (and that was something they couldn't overcome the estaligsment with in pure numbers) when this includes governing and working within congress and the presidency. All that counts for jack if the candidates can't work through the system properly, which the JD's are having troubles with.

However, there are positives in all this. Queens has shown the leftist movement there is growing, and that AOC herself is adapting to the behind the scenes maneuvering to get establishment people on her side so leftists like Caban can increase their chances at getting elected. That's smart. That's what more leftists politicians need to do to play the game right so they can beat liberals and centrists in their own backyard. But how many other leftists politicians are having her success? AOC can't save the movement by herself.
 

Gobias-Ind

Member
Nov 22, 2017
4,026
The NY State primary setup built to deliberately depress turnout in order to let organized labor steamroll elections in an organized machine is completely backfiring on them in the modern post-union base world.

There was no uptick in turnout in 2016. The revolution did not materialize then, and it won't materialize in the future.


Sit down 31-year old Latina queer Tiffany Caban, you and your silly little revolution need to be humble
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,123
Brooklyn, NY
Ah, I see the usual suspects are concern-trolling the left and trying to claim that the New York Democratic machine is drastically different from the national party establishment. It really isn't, just more blatant about it.

Anyway, so happy for Caban. Canvassed for her yesterday; mood at the victory party was amazing last night. When was the last time you heard sex workers or black trans women talked about in a victory speech?
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
Ah, I see the usual suspects are concern-trolling the left and trying to claim that the New York Democratic machine is drastically different from the national party establishment. It really isn't, just more blatant about it.

Talking about the Left objectively isn't concern trolling, I haven't said anything untrue. This is the Democratic party, not the Leftist party. We have a right to voice our opinions as you do. If anything you're not fearing the establishment enough.

Who said anything about the New York Machine being any different than the national party? That's blatantly obvious and that's just one operation the JD's haven't put a scratch on.

Anyway, so happy for Caban. Canvassed for her yesterday; mood at the victory party was amazing last night. When was the last time you heard sex workers or black trans women talked about in a victory speech?

Good! I'm happy for you. No-one in this thread is arguing that Caban winning was bad, on the contrary.
 

Kusagari

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,519
The thing is, this isn't just a Queens trend, though Queens has certainly gone the farthest. Larry Krasner in Philadelphia basically counts as anti-incarceratial too and was elected in 2018. I think the left has given him a lot of leeway so far because it's hard to know what is reasonably expected, so more examples is going to be really helpful.

I've heard good things about Rachael Rollins & Andrea Harrington in MA too.

The DSA and progressive organizations thrive in these big cities. I think they've realized, especially after AOC, just how powerful they are as a unit when they combine their forces together. Unlike with AOC, who many groups were wary of backing because Crowley was seen as such a lock, they all coalesced around Caban relatively quickly. The recent DSA city council elections in Denver and Chicago show they're learning to put these forces to good use outside of NYC.

The problem is extending this movement beyond liberal bastions like Seattle, NYC, Chicago, Denver, Boston and Philly.
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
Do you think that we think the establishment will just roll over easily? Do you believe that we don't anticipate them setting up obstacles and make things as difficult as possible?

Yes. It's why so many were blindsided by the establishment blacklisting the insurgent contractors and ignored the repeated warnings not to poke the bear for months. Too many act like the hard part's already over and victory is assured.
 

Deleted member 1445

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,140
Talking about the Left objectively isn't concern trolling, I haven't said anything untrue. This is the Democratic party, not the Leftist party. We have a right to voice our opinions as you do. If anything you're not fearing the establishment enough.
And what opinion is that? I don't see you coming to any sort of coherent point throughout all your text. All you do is rail on and on, based on a mountain of assumptions. You're creating a fantasy where you're the only rational person, by assuming that 1 - all of what you're saying is true, 2 - whatever blanket statement fits your narrative is true as well. You'd do well to be more concise and get to the point so that others can actually respond to only a few claims per post, instead of 1000.

Also, you saying that activism isn't real change is just unpalatable. Activists are the people who put in real hard work, we should respect that because we're all riding on their efforts.
 

Cow Mengde

Member
Oct 26, 2017
12,741
I voted for her last night. The sad truth is that I wasn't even aware of this election had it not been her campaign calling me and telling me about the election. Ask for some info, looked at her website, and decided I was going to vote after work. Good thing the polls were open late.
 
Oct 27, 2017
10,660
And what opinion is that? I don't see you coming to any sort of coherent point throughout all your text. All you do is rail on and on, based on a mountain of assumptions. You're creating a fantasy where you're the only rational person, by assuming that 1 - all of what you're saying is true, 2 - whatever blanket statement fits your narrative is true as well. You'd do well to be more concise and get to the point so that others can actually respond to only a few claims per post, instead of 1000.

Also, you saying that activism isn't real change is just unpalatable. Activists are the people who put in real hard work, we should respect that because we're all riding on their efforts.
Yeah, it's a little startling to see such rhetoric against what is a positive for all. It's like people are upset things might change and get better because it upsets the "system"...
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
And what opinion is that? I don't see you coming to any sort of coherent point throughout all your text. All you do is rail on and on, based on a mountain of assumptions. You're creating a fantasy where you're the only rational person, by assuming that 1 - all of what you're saying is true, 2 - whatever blanket statement fits your narrative is true as well. You'd do well to be more concise and get to the point so that others can actually respond to only a few claims per post, instead of 1000.

Again, what did I say which was untrue? I didn't make any assumptions I based it on facts. If you think what I said was wrong, show me the receipts.

I made my stance perfectly clear, and the posts examined the left's impact on politics - which covered the big and all details because this is a large subject that isn't limited to Queens.

That's a fair complaint.

Also, you saying that activism isn't real change is just unpalatable. Bah.

Not on the scale you're thinking of. Expecting President Bernie is going to bring the GOP to its knees purely with activism he never managed before is a massive assumption. If he could do that why didn't he pull that stunt while Obama was in office or running in '16?

Yeah, it's a little startling to see such rhetoric against what is a positive for all. It's like people are upset things might change and get better because it upsets the "system"...

So you're going to omit the nice things I said about the Queens' leftists groups, AOC and Caban winning. Ok.

Of course I want things to get better, I've been put that in bright neon lights on my posts. You can't miss it.
 

Deleted member 22490

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
9,237
Yes. It's why so many were blindsided by the establishment blacklisting the insurgent contractors and ignored the repeated warnings not to poke the bear for months. Too many act like the hard part's already over and victory is assured.
Lol. No we don't. A lot are disappointed and angry, yes, but we use that anger to keep fighting.

The bear has to be poked for substantive change to happen. It's inevitable and necessary. Trying to warn us to not do that is siding with the status quo.

You would have done the same thing with the Black Panthers.
 

RumbleHumble

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,128
Hoping for a win here. Few people understand the problems weighing down the American criminal justice system quite like a prosecutor. That said, hopefully she doesn't swing hard the other way if she wins office. We've got plenty of PDs turned judges in my state, and its always a coin-flip whether they go harder on defendants than former prosecutors.
 

Deleted member 1445

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,140
Again, what did I say which was untrue? I didn't make any assumptions I based it on facts. If you think what I said was wrong, show me the receipts.
Those aren't facts. Just one post of yours:

"You did all this for 20+ years, and all you got was 7 people elected in the House in safe districts and a failed POTUS candidate who needed the entire field cleared by Hillary to stand a chance."
Who is you? "The left"? "needed the entire field cleared by Hillary to stand a chance" is objective now? In what world.

"It's telling in your response that you're not engaging with the details of my argument that your movement is as strong as you think it is. I know all of that, it's boiler plate activist speak but we're not talking about activism we're talking about making real change, which requires working within the system itself. That's not going to count for shit, either, when you don't have money to back your candidates, the media on their side or establishment rival candidates underestimating leftists like Crowley did."
Activism is absolutely making real change, it's also working within the "system itself". Activism is not some magical thing outside of the system. The last bit is also anything but objective, it's just a contrived sentence shouting into the void, what point does it serve? (rhetorical question)

"They certainly don't if you don't fight back properly, what are the JD's doing about the Senate races? What are their plans to do about the courts? What are they don't to get the establishment on board with their plans and to fill in the weaknesses the establishment missed? What are they going to do to break that cycle?"
What point are you even trying to make here? Are you trying to make a word count or something? If you're trying to imply something, come out with what you mean. This is "asking questions" in a rhetorical way, but it doesn't work because they don't have the answers that fit in your context of negativity.

"Your Bernie argument is flawed. It posits that he's the only leftist politician in the country who can accomplish this feat and omits the fact he's never shown to do this. He couldn't even beat Hillary Clinton head to head. He's created a moment, it didn't do 1/10th of that, it might be decades before it'll be ready to do anything like that. He should have done this 20 years ago, when we had time to combat climate change, by now the movement might have have grown to the right size to make actual change we need."
Again, subjectivity. You can't conclusively say someone can start a movement, because your feel on who can, is subjective. There's nothing wrong with thinking that Bernie isn't or wont be able to keep the movement growing, but you posit it as if this is some sort of fact. It's not, it's your subjective opinion. It's inherent with matters that are this complex.

"What's missing is that your solely focused on getting candidates elected* (and that was something they couldn't overcome the estaligsment with in pure numbers) when this includes governing and working within congress and the presidency**. All that counts for jack if the candidates can't work through the system properly, which the JD's are having troubles with**."
* assumption
** obvious statement, unnecessary. (you're implying that these people don't work within congress or the presidency, which is also false)
*** by who's metric? also not nearly a fact, and would be heavily disputed by most here, but for you, it's just a throwaway line in a string of posts.

"However, there are positives in all this*. Queens has shown the leftist movement there is growing, and that AOC herself is adapting to the behind the scenes maneuvering to get establishment people on her side** so leftists like Caban can increase their chances at getting elected. That's smart. That's what more leftists politicians need to do to play the game right*** so they can beat liberals and centrists in their own backyard. But how many other leftists politicians are having her success? AOC can't save the movement by herself.
* you show yourself to not be open to any sort of disagreement on any of your previous statements
** assumption. she was "maneuvering" from the start, regardless of whatever you really mean by that.
*** assumption and condescending, as if they're not already doing it.

You seem to have your own absolutist view of how politics work, which is just very shortsighted. Honestly, you post as if nothing is up for debate. If you know politics so well that you can write up countless statements like these then why not prove it. Do what you need to do, instead of criticizing the honest efforts of other people, and talking down to other people who don't share your view on how politics works.

I made my stance perfectly clear, and the posts examined the left's impact on politics - which covered the big and all details because this is a large subject that isn't limited to Queens.
It's not clear at all because your stance seems to be a complete worldview on how politics work, none of which you are interested in discussing.

Of course I want things to get better, I've been put that in bright neon lights on my posts. You can't miss it.
You don't make things better by making every discussion in to a Shapiro style win-lose battle. You make things better by being constructive, concise, trying to come to a common understanding, and give people the benefit of the doubt wrt intent and abilities. I don't see you doing much of that to be honest.
 

LordByron28

Member
Nov 5, 2017
2,348
You did all this for 20+ years, and all you got was 7 people elected in the House in safe districts and a failed POTUS candidate who needed the entire field cleared by Hillary to stand a chance. It's telling in your response that you're not engaging with the details of my argument that your movement is as strong as you think it is. I know all of that, it's boiler plate activist speak but we're not talking about activism we're talking about making real change, which requires working within the system itself. That's not going to count for shit, either, when you don't have money to back your candidates, the media on their side or establishment rival candidates underestimating leftists like Crowley did.

They certainly don't if you don't fight back properly, what are the JD's doing about the Senate races? What are their plans to do about the courts? What are they don't to get the establishment on board with their plans and to fill in the weaknesses the establishment missed? What are they going to do to break that cycle?

Your Bernie argument is flawed. It posits that he's the only leftist politician in the country who can accomplish this feat and omits the fact he's never shown to do this. He couldn't even beat Hillary Clinton head to head. He's created a moment, it didn't do 1/10th of that, it might be decades before it'll be ready to do anything like that. He should have done this 20 years ago, when we had time to combat climate change, by now the movement might have have grown to the right size to make actual change we need.

What's missing is that your solely focused on getting candidates elected (and that was something they couldn't overcome the estaligsment with in pure numbers) when this includes governing and working within congress and the presidency. All that counts for jack if the candidates can't work through the system properly, which the JD's are having troubles with.

However, there are positives in all this. Queens has shown the leftist movement there is growing, and that AOC herself is adapting to the behind the scenes maneuvering to get establishment people on her side so leftists like Caban can increase their chances at getting elected. That's smart. That's what more leftists politicians need to do to play the game right so they can beat liberals and centrists in their own backyard. But how many other leftists politicians are having her success? AOC can't save the movement by herself.
Meh, Bernie most definitely built momentum. There is a reason why Hillary kept moving further to the left in the primary and made some small concessions to his base. There is also a reason why future, young leaders in Congress such as AOC and Omar are adopting a lot of the same philosophies. In fact AOC was a Sanders campaigner in 2016. The Green New Deal was created because of AOC. The Green New Deal now is seen as a political litmus test and is a pretty big deal to many. AOC is probably one of the biggest politicians to hit the scene in the longest time. The establishment left and the entire right wing come for her non-stop.

I dont believe Bernie is the sole person that can accomplish a lot of his goals but I'd prefer his and AOC's leadership for the left. Everyone makes fun of the Democrats for being weak and not being able to do anything. That comes down to current leadership caring more about aggresively shutting down any radical, too progressive, or outside thinking for their bills, proposals or even comments within their own party. While treating the other side with kids gloves. I want leadership that actually treats people within their own party with more respect than Republicans. Why do we never make compromises within our own party between moderate Democrats and far left ones? I dont want leadership that laughs at young people for protesting saying I remember when I was young and making dismissive comments about their thoughts.

I'd prefer leadership that would be less concerned about AOC calling Trump's camps, concentration camps, which they are. More concern around Trump actually being served justice.
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2017
16,639
I voted for her last night. The sad truth is that I wasn't even aware of this election had it not been her campaign calling me and telling me about the election. Ask for some info, looked at her website, and decided I was going to vote after work. Good thing the polls were open late.
It's the same old song and dance. The presidential election is shouted from the roof tops but local elections are barely whispered. It's by design.

Also it was annoying to find out what really was on the ballot as there were different races for each borough.
 
OP
OP
GK86

GK86

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,832
I voted for her last night. The sad truth is that I wasn't even aware of this election had it not been her campaign calling me and telling me about the election. Ask for some info, looked at her website, and decided I was going to vote after work. Good thing the polls were open late.

I knew about the race since end of May. I had to track down information as to what exactly we were voting for and who the candidates were. Try to find information on their policies, etc.

But even with all that I was still surprised when I learned on election day that I would also be voting for a judge.
 

Deleted member 10551

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,031
We might not win the primary in 2020, but we're building momentum very similarly to how folks like Goldwater built it up for Reagan. In the US, these processes take about 12-16 years.