Democratic Socialist anti zionist wins NYC mayor Dem primary

Post Reply New Topic

“Two days ago, an act of senseless violence took the lives of Officer Didarul Islam, Wesley LePatner, Aland Etienne, and Julia Hyman. Today, I visited Officer Islam's family and learned of his legacy. I ask you to join me in honoring the memory of these four New Yorkers,” Mamdani wrote.

An individual wrote, “Zohran Mamdani exposed as a total fraud. Mocking cops, calling them racist, then acting like he cares? No loyalty to America. He belongs in Uganda, not leading NYC. Deport him and protect our city!” Another shared a screenshot of his 2020 post featuring the hashtag “#DefundTheNYPD.”

A third questioned, “Just think what would have happened if you would have defunded the Police like you wanted.” A fourth remarked, “And you want to defund the police?”

During the mass shooting, Mamdani was in Uganda for his wedding. He returned Wednesday and reportedly went straight to Islam's home to meet his family. He was photographed by the New York Post outside the house, holding flowers. In another picture, he was seen hugging a relative of Islam.

"I landed back in New York City this morning and went directly to the home of Officer Islam, where I met with members of his family, young and old who are heartbroken over the loss of their son, of their brother, their father, their husband, their friend. Heartbroken in a way that words cannot fully describe,” Mamdani told reporters. He added, "We spent close to an hour together, there were moments that stayed with me.”

Mamdani continued, "They welcomed me into their home. They refused to let me leave until I had breakfast with them," adding, "They are an embodiment of so much of what makes this city the one that we love."

How is your post including racism relevant for the discussion of Mamdani or the mayoral race? Clarification needed.

...An individual wrote, “Zohran Mamdani exposed as a total fraud. Mocking cops, calling them racist, then acting like he cares? No loyalty to America. He belongs in Uganda, not leading NYC. Deport him and protect our city!”...

I take hate, racism in this case, serious. How you can read that quote and not take away that it's racist, confound me.



An individual on social media?? How is the person relevant or the opinion? Especially when it's racism.
And also, what is the thinking of highlighting this remark (and other) as one of the more important pieces of information from the entire article? Even if you're not the original poster, it is as reprehensible to re post it. Both for the journalist (if you can call her that) and the WP member.

I take hate, racism in this case, serious. How you can read that quote and not take away that it's racist, confound me.



An individual on social media?? How is the person relevant or the opinion? Especially when it's racism.
And also, what is the thinking of highlighting this remark (and other) as one of the more important pieces of information from the entire article? Even if you're not the original poster, it is as reprehensible to re post it. Both for the journalist (if you can call her that) and the WP member.

Mamdani would be the city's first Muslim mayor and its first Asian American mayor.

Jewish New Yorkers support Zohran Mamdani more than any candidate for mayor, but they strongly disagree about how he would shape their future, says a new poll from a pro-Israel nonprofit.

Mamdani is pulling the largest share of Jewish voters at 37%, with the rest dispersed between his competitors, Mayor Eric Adams (25%), former Gov. Andrew Cuomo (21%) and Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa (14%), according to the poll commissioned by New York Solidarity Network and conducted by GQR.

The results largely align with a poll by Zenith Research and Public Progress Solutions earlier this week, which had Cuomo ahead of Adams, but still showed Mamdani holding a significant lead without a majority of Jewish support. Public Progress Solutions is run by an ally of Mamdani, while New York Solidarity Network campaigned against him in the primary.

The new survey explored Jewish voters’ sentiments about antisemitism, Israel and their concerns as New Yorkers. Among the 800 people surveyed, 74% said they worried about antisemitism. But they differed on where that threat came from — about half said they believed Mamdani was antisemitic, while nearly all of his Jewish supporters disagreed.

They also diverged on the overlap between pro-Palestinian slogans and antisemitism: Three in five Jewish voters said the phrases “globalize the intifada” and “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” were antisemitic. (Mamdani, a vocal critic of Israel, has come under fire for declining to condemn the former slogan.)

But they said they were basing their votes primarily on local matters: 76% said they based their vote on issues like affordability and crime, with only 17% centering their future mayor’s views on Israel. The Jews who supported Mamdani were most motivated by his promises to tax the wealthy, build affordable housing and focus on mental health officers rather than police to prevent crime.

Mamdani’s stance drove 17% of Jewish voters, the poll found.

In comparison, 62% of all Mamdani voters said they were driven by his pro-Palestinian advocacy, according to another recent poll by the Institute for Middle East Understanding Policy Project.

Many Jews surveyed by New York Solidarity Group said they believed their future is in danger — 58% believe the city will be less safe for Jews under Mamdani’s leadership, including a large contingent of older voters.

Sara Forman, the group’s executive director, told Politico she wanted Mamdani to understand the concerns weighing on Jewish New Yorkers. Her message for him signaled that even staunchly pro-Israel Jewish leaders may be resigning themselves to the idea that Mamdani will prevail in November, leaving them no choice but to collaborate with him.

The social media poster is representative of a certain way of thinking. A way of thinking the people can’t say publicly but the anonymity of social media allows them to say.

Yes it is one individual, but I have read about people expressing this sentiment in social media, in letters to the editor etc. Living in the New York region I have heard people express these sentiments if in one form or another for decades.

Attempts to bury this is a form of denial.

The reporter is not an outlier. Quoting random individuals as representative of an opinion is common journalistic practice.

This is a case to me of someone who has their head in the clouds so to speak, sounds like utopia on paper but in real life, yeah ain't gonna happen. I mean a city run supermarket? replacing cops with social workers.

I visited Copenhagen last week. There they have a vehicle called Socialance...

I call BS.



Yet, it is publish publicly and furthermore published on what claims to be media platform and also publish by you here on WP. For something that can't be said publicly, by your account, it sure does being repeated a lot. On that moronic reasoning from you, I call BS.
This way of thinking is nothing more than racism, and you trying to legitimize it.
Not long ago people hesitated to speak these things publicly because they knew society wouldn't stand for it. It doesn't mean racism didn't exist but consensus and laws stated we wouldn't have it in public. But with figures like Putin, Netanyahu, Erdogan, Orban and Trump as leaders racist people have become embolden and laws have been rolled back or ignored.




Yes, racism has existed for a very long time. And it's not exclusive for New York. I have heard people express these racist sentiment in Sweden, Denmark and Germany. It doesn't mean I will tolerate it.




Only way I agree with you on it being denial is if you believe racism is a justified set of belief. Since I'm not of that opinion I'm not bury it - I reject racism. I won't have it.




I totally disagree, and I think you are conflating social media with journalism. I consider the WP-forum as a social media. If I quote what you say, it doesn't make me a reporter that's practicing journalism.
You are free to believe that, if that's the case. Surely, we should have higher standards than that.

I would appreciate if you kept the racism to yourself in the future.

Nowadays, journalists use social media as a source on a regular basis. The days when social media only counted as a legitimate source if journalists had no other access to events like disasters or civil war have long since passed. Instead, they have become part of the fabric of modern journalism.

How Popular Is Social Media As A Source?
Yet, how often are Facebook and Twitter really used by journalists as a source? Our study tried to find out. For this purpose, we used computer-assisted methods and manual analysis to analyse reporting in the newspapers Süddeutsche Zeitung, New York Times and Guardian between 2004 and 2016 (analysing a total of approximately three million articles).

Many older studies work on the assumption that the use of social media as a source has recently been stagnating in quantitative terms. And in some sense they are right. We did, in fact, discover a levelling-off of the adaptation curve (see graph 1): year by year at the beginning of the decade, fewer new people registered on social media platforms; in parallel, the growth in the number of references to social media in journalists’ reporting also stagnated.

But this plateau-forming phase has come to an end. As our study shows, the number of social media quotations has increased noticeably in the last few years. The intensity of growth as well as the absolute level are higher in the Anglo-American newspapers than in the German Süddeutsche Zeitung; but the trend can be seen here, too. In all three papers, journalists quote ever more platform content. Twitter, despite its significantly smaller user base in all countries, is more popular than Facebook. The journalistic adaptation of social media as a research tool has clearly not yet come to an end.

Especially for the case of Twitter, we can trace the increase in references, above all, to the increase in the elite sources quoted (see graph). The supposed medium of the masses is, essentially, a mouthpiece for those who were already determining the headlines in the pre-digital age. This attracts journalists whose presence, in turn, triggers an influx of further elites – the platform thus develops into an irresistible gravitational field for everyone who is searching for mass-media attention, including propagandists and conspiracy theorists.

How Should Journalists Deal With Social Media
What can we learn from all this? Should journalists renounce social media? For all its disadvantages, digital intermediaries do, of course, have the potential to make journalism better, more diverse, more immediate. But despite all the euphoria that accompanied the adaptation of social media in the past, the pitfalls they entail cannot be ignored. What is missing so far are established reflective practices for handling the new tool with detachment.

Platforms and journalism intertwine on different levels: they are important channels for journalism, powerful traffic referrers; they advertise with initiatives and millions in sponsorship for collaborative partners in the media sector. From the journalists’ perspective, it is the embrace of “frenemies”, as Emily Bell has called the intermediaries: friends and enemies all in one. In order to preserve independence and remain sensitive to social reality, journalism has to keep its distance – in all directions.

Interesting but off topic

You need to figure out the difference between exposing racism and endorsing it.

This is 2025. Social Media is how people communicate. For the traditional media to ignore what is said is living in the past, thus a failure to do their jobs.