Anonymous #2 4w

why does kamalas stance matter now? might that have been important?

1

Anonymous #1 4w

Sure.

-2

Anonymous #3 4w

Kamala backed the Green New Deal, student debt relief, Black maternal health, labor protections, marijuana decrim, abortion rights,$6000 tax credit for new parents, and even pushed for $25K homebuyer grants for first-gen buyers. Kamala raised the most money of any modern campaign in only 107 days. On the Debate stage she said Israel was committing a crime against humanity. Her campaign wasn’t “dogshit”

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

Does a mayor have the same power as president?

1

Anonymous #1 4w

Its not about him being Mayor. The left during the campaign made it very clear that they weren’t going to support any politician that even entertained meeting with, working with, or entertaining ANYONE who was complicit in/ supported genocide. Those were the rules the Left set. However conveniently when it’s someone the left likes suddenly they can find the nuance, somehow they aren’t disgusted with a full blown photoshoot with Mamdani and Trump. (Again they celebrated it)

0

Anonymous OP 4w

It 100% is about his capacity for power. Are you on the left?

1

Anonymous OP 4w

full blown photoshoot being mamdani getting walked around and into the oval office by a guy he calls a fascist, and being the lesser power in that situation means..................? mamdani hasnt changed against anything he said. he has never (at least to my knowledge) backed down against saying israel is committing a genocide, not in 2025, not in 2020, not before. not in the oval office, not while running in the place with a huge jewish population, not ever.

6

Anonymous #1 4w

Ok, im simply stating what was told to me during the campaign as to why people would not support Kamala. However to your question earlier, “Does a mayor have the same power as president” I can ask the same thing about a VP and president. Wether Kamala called for a ceasefire every day or never she had no weight in Bidens decision to handle Gaza

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

kamala DID support the green new deal, and then on the campaign trail weaved her way into supporting oil drilling, bragging about the highest ever domestic production under HER biden-harris admin. student debt relief - pretty cool! biden was in office and couldnt really get that done because of the non electoral supreme court obstacle, so kind of meaningless. black maternal health, labor protections, marijuana decriminalization, all pretty cool and needed.

3

Anonymous OP 4w

You didn’t answer. She WOULD have been president. She chose not to say what Mamdani has said about Israel. She chose not to do a lot of things and run with established democratic policies. Mamdani is a mayor, his focus has always been NYC but has said his stance on international affairs. He’s doing and advocates for what he’s capable of changing. Harris did the same, her stance just impacts more.

1

Anonymous OP 4w

abortion rights again i believe goes to scotus at least to some degree so just not really achievable. 6000$ credit for parents is legitimately not enough to cover the hospital bill for like the bed of delivery. its a nice gesture but people see that and see a gesture and nothing more. 25k homebuyer grant, pretty nice, not sure how actually impactful that is given the real estate market and peoples' ability to actually buy. the money raised had literal hundreds of millions coming from biden

1

Anonymous OP 4w

im not great at tracking where the money came from even using sites like opensecrets or followthemoney, but lots of elite companies or people were donating to superpacs or the campaign itself (depending on which they can do), which means a huge amount "raised" isnt reflective of how people actually felt, just how some significant figures felt.

1

Anonymous #1 4w

She said plenty of times what Israel did was wrong. She even refused a meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu and instead went out to support Zeta Phi Beta that particular day. However my whole point isnt bashing Mamdani or praising Kamala, its questioning the left moving the goalposts. Last year it didn’t matter WHO the person was, anyone entertaining someone involved with genocide was a hard no (nuance aside) thats what was said, but now Mamdani get nuance and understanding.

0

Anonymous OP 4w

i dont really see where she said israel was doing any of that. all she ever said was to namelessly say "whats happening in gaza is devastating" like its a natural disaster. she legitimately had like a 2:1 ratio of "israel must defend itself" to "gaza is harmed by an unnamed entity"

1

Anonymous OP 4w

so the conversation is about kamalas campaign for president. she could have been hootin and hollerin about biden isnt doing enough, my voice isnt loud enough with him, he wont let me stop OUR FUNDING OF THE GENOCIDE AND WAR CRIMES, but AS PRESIDENT ILL STOP THAT AND WORK TO STOP THE GENOCIDE. but she didnt. its not proximity to trump or whoever, its that she never bothered to distinguish herself because it didnt matter to her

1

Anonymous OP 4w

she saw it mattered to her campaign sometimes, so she stuck a pinky out and called it a day, going to a sorority instead of a meeting. the goalposts havent changed with mamdani meeting with trump. the expectation was never "mamdani you need to step on his neck until he stops this" because thats not his role. hes there as a mayor doing mayoral duties, and his "photoshoot" was one picture by himself when they were already there, when he was on a trump photoshoot walking to their meeting.

1

Anonymous #2 4w

I don’t disagree that she should have taken a stronger stance. However there were a couple of different dynamics at play, 1. She was still actively working for Biden 2. They shared a campaign team 3. On the debate stage and even in her interactions with Benjamin Netanyahu we could see that she did not agree with him. I can fully stand here and say that she was weak on her stance with Gaza, however im saying its interesting that she gets/got absolutely no nuance for her actions, but Mamdani does.

1

Anonymous OP 4w

supporting kamala was: backing a person who cant even include israel in "the devastation in gaza" other than as they need to defend themselves. she cant even say shes vetoing spending -- which she cant do, but that never stopped her when it came to claiming abortion rights or student loan relief or the green new deal. supporting mamdani was: a local politician who speaks extremely openly against something, as does a protester, but he does not have any immediate or remote ability to impact it

1

Anonymous OP 4w

if she was still actively working for biden, and campaigned as such, then its a shit campaign that completely ignores everything youve been saying because she wouldnt even disavow her boss' actions which DO REFLECT ON HER AS SHE IS IN THE ADMIN. just mindlessly clapping as he does whatever. if her campaign team had more say than her, then its hardly her campaign. this is no longer kamala harris, this is genuinely a puppet being instructed on what to say.

1

Anonymous OP 4w

on nuance: mamdani is saying he will do what he can within nyc to defund and disconnect from israel (theres strange connections, like the nypd trains with israel and we own their bonds or some shit), and he protests when he does not have power, and has forever. he says in the oval office israel is committing a genocide, extremely plainly. kamala? nothing. israel needs to defend itself. we need to fund that. gaza is suffering from a natural disaster

1

Anonymous #2 4w

Kamala did say Israel has the right to defend itself. Israel has been a 60 + year ally to America (I hate that, you hate that, it is what it is). But to say Kamala said nothing is untrue. She called for a ceasefire before and during her campaign, she called it a human rights violation, devastating, and indeed called out Benjamin Netanyahu. However my original post is not pro Kamala or anti Mamdani. Its challenging the left’s inconsistency. Of course Mamdani is going to have to talk to and…

0

Anonymous #2 4w

With Trump, the same way as VP and presidential nominee, there were certain things that forced Kamala to maneuver in a way that put her in a tough spot. But yall got it. Im done

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

there is no inconsistency. no double standard. kamala did not do something, mamdani did. in the oval office, one of them said "it is a genocide" while the other wanted to continue funding "devastation" if you had a friend you allowed to live on your couch, you help fund them getting back on their feet, and find they use your money to kill innocent people, why in gods name would you continue to fund that.

5

Anonymous OP 4w

she ran a shit campaign, which was not fully her own campaign, but even if it was? theres still no double standard. she earned the loss, she earned the contempt. others certainly helped, but a breeze didnt make her walk.

6

Anonymous OP 4w

You didn’t answer. Hurry up.

1

Anonymous OP 4w

Oh you’re just running away, nevermind. Got it. You just aren’t capable of an honest discussion.

1

Anonymous #1 4w

Theres no honest discussion being had here. Yall turned this into a different discussion and didn’t even address my original point. To pretend like no one on the left said to not support anyone who works with anyone complicit in genocide is dishonest. Im not saying its a bad thing that Mamdani met with Trump, im saying based on what leftist said during Kamalas campaign, it was a hard no on working with anyone complicit in genocide. However now that Mamdani is doing it, nuance is allowed.

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

You couldn’t answer the singular question I asked here. You’re right there’s no honest discussion to be had, but only. cause you were incapable of engaging that way.

1

Anonymous #1 4w

Why would I answer your question when 1. You never addressed my original point 2. Your question on if im on the left doesn’t change anything about the point im making. Im a Democrat, so yes I am left leaning 3. You are saying have an honest discussion when from the jump you have insulted me, never once have I questioned your intelligence or integrity yet you have done this constantly to me.

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

1. You acknowledge I asked something and yet can’t answer because it doesn’t benefit you directly. That’s dishonest. 2. It 100% changes how I argue and contest your points I view them differently yes. False dichotomy, also dishonest. 3. You being offended by me repeating what happened doesn’t make it an insult. Maybe don’t avoid things for the sake of your own selfish interest rather than a dialogue between two ideas

1

Anonymous #1 4w

Youre very first comment was an attack on my intelligence, why would I assume positive intent from you? I voiced a frustration/concern that many people who look like me have pointed out. If you wanted to have an honest discussion then attempt to see where im coming from. You wont even take accountability for starting off aggressive.

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

Your** Thanks for another moment of me being reaffirmed that you aren’t. You aren’t very bright, I got that from your post, and multiple times through our interactions. I don’t care if you don’t like what I say, but it’s not honest if you’re not willing to answer a singular question. I’m not going to change the way that I speak to you when you’re so blatantly ignorant and dense on the position you hold. You deserve to have your ideas contested, so you learn. You do not deserve kindness when-

1

Anonymous OP 4w

-The world is at your fingertips and you choose to stay ignorant.

1

Anonymous #1 4w

Whatever, first you complain about having honest dialogue, I say you came off aggressive which made me not view this as a safe conversation, you then go back to the insults because I used the incorrect your on a yikyak post at 2:40 AM. If im not bright to someone like you thats fine, because you’re mean spirited, egotistical, and clearly don’t care about hearing different perspectives. Goodnight

-4

Anonymous OP 4w

Being mean is astronomically better than being ignorant. That’s a 3rd example.

0