House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) says New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is going to have to smooth things over with congressional Democrats after backing several progressive candidates who ousted incumbents during Tuesday’s primary elections.

Asked if Mamdani’s endorsements were making him “enemies” with Democrats in Washington, D.C., Jeffries told CNN that he and Mamdani “strongly” disagreed over his primary picks ahead of Election Day.

Now, according to Jeffries, the mayor has serious “work to do in terms of the conversations that he’s going to have with members of Congress moving forward.”

  • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    4 days ago

    Mamdani doesn’t have to smooth things over with anybody.

    Also, it’s pretty silly that Jeffries would say he needs to have conversations with “members of congress,” seeing as those people lost, so they won’t be members of congress for very much longer.

    Also, he’s the mayor of NYC, what the fuck does Congress have to say about anything he does?

    Jeffries is acting like his own picks are the word of god and isn’t taking responsibility for the fact that he’s a milquetoast centrist who accepts AIPAC money and that the voters don’t like his picks.

    Maybe if Mamdani’s picks are the ones who won the primaries then that just means Mamdani is more in touch with the average democratic voter. Maybe Mamdani should be the house minority leader, eh?

    Mamdani isn’t the one who has to explain himself.

      • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        4 days ago

        It’s not as simple as that. Many are, yes, but there’s also the progressive caucus and many who refuse to compromise on their integrity. AOC, Raskin, and many others.

        Conversely, as someone already pointed out, there are also corrupt, corporatist state Dems, and probably even local ones too. It’s not the level of government that makes the corruption, it’s the sources of funding and how those influence their voting record.

        Are they primarily funded by small donors and grassroots effort, or large donors and shadowy PACs? Do they serve their constituents or the oligarchy? These are the indicators we should focus on, not whether they’re state, local, or federal.

        The problem with the Democratic Party establishment is that it’s run by milquetoast, centrist, corporatist Dems who in any sane country would be considered center-right. There are plenty of disruptors within that party and they’re gaining a lot of momentum and influence, but they just haven’t risen to the echelons of Democrat leadership yet. I think they will within our lifetimes, if we can pull our democracy out of this death spiral with the constitutional order still intact.

        Honestly, I think the silver lining to all that’s happening now is that it’s really spurring people towards the progressives. And as people continue to see in larger numbers that progressive policy works (as in, it actually helps ordinary people and also as in it’s an electable platform), I think that momentum will become unstoppable.

        I don’t want to jinx anything but within the next few election cycles I think we’re going to start seeing the progressive caucus really start to increase their influence and eventually claim a majority within the Democratic Party.

        And hopefully that happens as the Republican party continues to fracture and shoot itself in the feet repeatedly as their ship sinks faster and faster, because all they know how to do is subvert, slander, lie, and manipulate, and people are catching on.

      • 7101334@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 days ago

        …and many state-level too, like Gavin Newsom and Scott Wiener. (As a Californian I am compelled to work “Fuck Newsom” into as many comments as possible.)

  • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    ·
    4 days ago

    Mr Jeffries,

    I am appalled that you, or any Democrats, think that you get to pick who it is that we, the people, vote for. You are a representative for us. You need to smooth things over with the American people because these others were voted in not because Mamdani is a cult of personality, but because they are doing and saying things the people like and want.

    When you and the party can do something successfully, such as codify LGBTQ rights (I.e., gay marriage, trans rights, etc), eliminate corporate government influence, ensure proper health care, and a laundry list of other things then maybe we can take you and your “preferred choices” seriously. Until then, watch change happen from the people that actually have to be in the trenches dealing with all of the American government’s fuckery. Please sit down, kindly shut up, and do your job of representing the people’s needs and not presenting your next potential colleague.

    Sincerely,

    An American Voter in Illinois

  • godsammitdam@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    4 days ago

    Now, according to Jeffries, the mayor has serious “work to do in terms of the conversations that he’s going to have with members of Congress moving forward.”

    More like establishment Dems are scared they’ll finally have to do work at all. Why don’t you write a strongly worded letter to Mamdani? Or is that too harsh an action given that’s the same level of opposition you’ve had against Trump?

  • infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    246
    ·
    5 days ago

    DNC leadership is pathetic. They have the most popular political leader in the country standing right alongside them and they can’t even support the guy, all because they lack the spine to tell their Israeli paylords to suck nut. Fucking corpo leech cowards.

    • neatchee@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      124
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      They’re not cowards. They know exactly what they’re doing. Mamdani doesn’t play ball with their established process. He is a threat to their paychecks and control. Mamdani just indicated to all of them “You might be the next one to lose your job if I decide I want someone else in your district”.

      They are not cowards. They are strategists prioritizing their own wants above that of the voters and human decency

      • unfortunate_ferret@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        60
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        They are strategists prioritizing their own wants above that of the voters and human decency

        Right, that’s what we said. Cowards.

        • neatchee@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          32
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 days ago

          you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means

          Greed and selfishness aren’t a form of cowardice, as far as I’m aware? To be cowardly, there must be a thing you are afraid of, the fear of which is preventing you from doing something you want or feel that you need to do

          Don’t let them off with just being scared. They’re selfish and amoral

          • Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 days ago

            Being brave is doing the right thing despite being scared. Being a coward is doing the wrong thing because you’re scared of doing what you know is right. Jefferies is scared of AIPAC, he’s scared of losing the money and power they lend him.

            • unfortunate_ferret@piefed.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              I appreciate that you picked up what I was putting down. So little room for artistry in written communication, nowadays.

            • neatchee@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              I don’t believe he thinks he’s wrong. I think he believes he’s doing the right thing

              Again, you give these people too much credit

              He’s not scared of doing what’s right. He doesn’t want to do what’s right. There’s a big difference.

              • Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 days ago

                He knows better than any of us exactly what Israel is doing to the people of Palestine. He knows it’s wrong, he gets the top secret versions of the stuff we see with children being blown up to pieces.

                But he’s scared that if says something against Israel his career is over. They really are cowards.

                • neatchee@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  whoa whoa whoa, if we’re talking SPECIFICALLY about whether they will speak out against Israel, then yes I agree they are cowards.

                  That’s a very specific issue though. And not indicative of their overall position IMO

            • neatchee@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              20
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              No, it’s really not, and you give them too much credit by saying that.

              Greed for these people is about having the biggest dick in the room. It’s about superiority and “winning”.

              It’s far more distasteful than fear

              EDIT: And furthermore, having fear doesn’t make you a coward. Cowardice is, again, when there is something you want or think you should do but you refuse due to fear of something.

              They just want to be rich. Even if it’s fear of poverty, that’s not cowardice.

  • Captain_Patchy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    4 days ago

    “TOP Democrat” Needs to realign himself to the new political reality that being “republican light” is only going to lose them votes and seats.

    The PEOPLE want better!

    Mandami and the Democratic Socialists are what people will actually come out and actually vote for. Jeffries needs to get his ass on the train or get left behind.

    • kreskin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Jeffries needs to get his ass on the train or get left behind.

      He’s not invited on the train. He should be tied to the tracks.

  • Bakkoda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    5 days ago

    Ah yes the house Democrats known for their fervor, backbone and hard fought results.

    You can’t even threaten an enemy properly and you are gonna threaten a fellow Democrat? Fuckin traitors. And they would be dealt with accordingly.

    • BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      It makes more sense when you realize they’re just the paid opposition party all these years. It explains all the ratchet effects and lack of real social progress.

      • justaman123@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 days ago

        I think it’s probably more complicated than that, like sure lots of people in the party end up as paid opposition and certainly the longer they are in Washington making the kinds of compromises they have to make to get anything done the better they get at rationalizing those decisions. But I wholly agree that things need to change from what they are

  • arctanthrope@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    113
    ·
    5 days ago

    he has to apologize for being aligned with what voters want? isn’t that, as political scientists call it, the whole fucking point of democracy?

    • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      5 days ago

      You of course know that america isn’t really a democracy. It’s a republic by design. And of course what it is in reality is a whole nuther something.

        • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          It’s true. When people say democracy, they usually mean direct democracy. That ain’t what we got. We have a representative democracy, often called a republic. And even at that, the party establishment control who we can even vote for. So we only get to choose from the representatives they give us for the most part.

      • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 days ago

        A republic is a type of democracy. Specifically, it’s a representative democracy.

        • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          When people say democracy, they usually mean direct democracy.
          And even at that, the party establishment control who we can even vote for. So we only get to choose from the representatives they give us for the most part.

          • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 days ago

            When people say democracy, they usually mean direct democracy.

            This just isn’t true. The majority of democracies around the world today are representative democracies, and people colloquially refer to them simply as democracies.

            And even at that, the party establishment control who we can even vote for. So we only get to choose from the representatives they give us for the most part.

            That’s partly true to varying degrees depending on what country you’re referring to, but it also isn’t that simple. The methods the establishment uses to control who gets party nominations are mostly indirect (i.e. media manipulating the narrative, PACs and dark money to campaigns, etc.). I think you’re being overly cynical - which is fair - but we have more power than you think we do, we’re just not very good at using it. Cynicism itself is one of the ways that the establishment controls who gets elected.

            In short: the establishment has a stranglehold on democracy not because our democracies are fake (flawed, maybe even rigged a bit, sure, but not fake), but because they have us out-organized.

            • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              I agree that nearly no countries are direct democracies. But most people don’t really know the difference. Just look how many people assume trump was the choice of the majority of americans. They don’t know what the elctoral college even does. They think that they are in a direct democrqcy, though they don’t know the name.

              Cynicisim itself does not mean one doesn’t participate in the process. I onow how it work, I know how badly the cards are stacked against me, but I vote anyway. And I read up on the local elections to make an informed decision. But I know that of the few who do vote, the majority don’t spend much time reading up on cadadites.

              And the establishment wins not because it is better organized, but because it has contol of more money.

        • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          Yes, I was being lazy typing. But when people say democracy, they usually mean direct democracy. And based on context, that was the meaning I took.

      • edible_funk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        It is a democracy, just a shitty type of one. There’s a bunch of different types and only like one is direct representation where every citizen votes on every issue and every time humans have tried that, they get real particular about what qualifies as citizen so it’s all more or less the same. Anyway, if you’re past high school you should probably retire that line of thinking because it’s reductive, useless, and actually false.

        • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Also, I would like to see a workable plan for increasing what we vite for without going full direct. But it’s really hard to remove the influence advertising can have on such thing.

        • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          When people say democracy, they usually mean direct democracy. That ain’t what we got. We have a representative democracy, often called a republic. And even at that, the party establishment control who we can even vote for. So we only get to choose from the representatives they give us for the most part. So what we have is the illusion of choice.

              • edible_funk@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                Provide example. Because there’s no place that has a complete direct democracy with every citizen voting on every piece of legislation like you say.

                • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  You put added words that I didn’t say. Nice try. The specifics you picked out tell me you already know the answer. Good job googling. Clearly you also know your are wrong, so now you are trying to change the statement to fit your interpretation of what I said. Fancy.

    • Rakonat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Take a way the overt racism and bigotry and the DNC and GOP leadership play the same game for the same team.

  • redsand@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    4 days ago

    Jeffries and Booker are whores. AIPAC owned whores who would 100% pull a Clarence Thomas for enough money.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      They work for us.

      The only power they have is because we LET them have it.

      Most of them need to be reminded. Very very much.