Mamdani won NYC with 51% of the vote; Harris got 65%. She got more total votes and a higher percentage than the guy who called himself a Socialist.
What Harris are you talking about? Kamala Harris? And what election? Because if you’re talking about the presidential election, she got like 48% of the popular vote. And what do you think the effect of cuomo ratfucking the election and splitting the vote was, on Mamdani’s performance?
Yeah no that wasn’t very clear. Still it’s a very misleading (or ill thought out) argument. As others have pointed out, you’re comparing apples and oranges here because the races had different number of realistic options for the electorate to choose from.
Either you vote for the Democratic Socialist, or you don’t.
Mamdani was running against Andrew Cuomo, who had to resign as NY Governor after being outed as a sexual predator. The GOP candidate was Curtis Silwa, a radio shock jock with zero government experience.
If there was a big Socialist majority in New York, it chose to stay home.
And exactly one person couldn’t figure out what I was talking about, so I think it’s more on them than I what I wrote.
Mamdani was running against Andrew Cuomo, who had to resign as NY Governor after being outed as a sexual predator. The GOP candidate was Curtis Silwa, a radio shock jock with zero government experience.
One, two, three! Three candidates, ah ah ah!
Or are you saying that candidates with no government experience don’t count? Because then I must ask how Hillary Clinton managed to lose a presidential election where she was the only candidate.
What Harris are you talking about? Kamala Harris? And what election? Because if you’re talking about the presidential election, she got like 48% of the popular vote. And what do you think the effect of cuomo ratfucking the election and splitting the vote was, on Mamdani’s performance?
I think you misunderstood them, aren’t they referring to the vote in NYC? Harris won in NYC by a good margin
Yes, I was referring to the NYC vote.
I thought that would be obvious, but apparently some folks need more explanation
Thanks for replying to them.
Yeah no that wasn’t very clear. Still it’s a very misleading (or ill thought out) argument. As others have pointed out, you’re comparing apples and oranges here because the races had different number of realistic options for the electorate to choose from.
Actually, it’s an either/or option.
Either you vote for the Democratic Socialist, or you don’t.
Mamdani was running against Andrew Cuomo, who had to resign as NY Governor after being outed as a sexual predator. The GOP candidate was Curtis Silwa, a radio shock jock with zero government experience.
If there was a big Socialist majority in New York, it chose to stay home.
And exactly one person couldn’t figure out what I was talking about, so I think it’s more on them than I what I wrote.
One, two, three! Three candidates, ah ah ah!
Or are you saying that candidates with no government experience don’t count? Because then I must ask how Hillary Clinton managed to lose a presidential election where she was the only candidate.
So you’re saying that there were three candidates running and all three were Socialists?
And yes, quoting a Sesame Street character certainly makes me think that you are a knowledgeable commenter.
And I’ll repeat the original comment.
Mamdani got fewer total votes than Harris got in New York City. Harris got 65% of New York City’s votes, and Mamdani got 51%.
No I’m saying you’re comparing a three way choice with a two way choice, which is not a valid comparison. Can’t make it simpler than that.
Just because you made it simple doesn’t mean you made it right.
If there’s a multiple choice test, it doesn’t matter how many wrong answers there are, there is only one right answer.
People had a chance to vote for a DSA candidate and most either stayed home or voted for the other guys.
I’ll cheerfully admit that Mamdani has done a great job and will almost certainly get reelected easily.