And quite frankly, Lander probably has a much better shot at winning that primary, Mamdani endorsement or no. So there’s some realpolitik in play as well.

[–] TreadOnMe@hexbear.net 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Why endorse at all? Why not just do what he promised, just keep his mouth shut and focus on his plan for running the city?

Obama 2.0, that's why. Dude is already planning for the future.

We'll see if he is able to convert into something for anyone other than himself, but right now, by centering everything around purely himself without anything to show for it, without even honoring a vote, he is setting up the political machine to be around himself and no one else, which is mighty dangerous for someone who is supposedly challenging the system. Even Lenin at least entertained a pretense towards democratic decisions within the party, even if he liked to stack the deck. At this point DSA is literally more 'authoritarian' than the Bolsheviks.

[–] PKMKII@hexbear.net 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Obama 2.0, that's why. Dude is already planning for the future.

He can’t be a literal Obama 2.0, as he wasn’t born in the US and thus can’t be president. Even if we’re talking about a more small-scale Obama, mayor of NYC is a notorious political dead end. There’s a long history of politicians trying and failing to translate being mayor into higher offices. If this some Machiavellian power scheme, and not just bog standard “you scratched my back now I’ll scratch yours” politics, it’s a bad one.

[–] TreadOnMe@hexbear.net 7 points 1 week ago

Obama is just the most convenient example, I've seen dozens of progressive politicians do the same thing as Zohran here, and it usually ends as the gravy train of speaking gigs for non-profits and universities. This type of person is what San Francisco was built on.