superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 8,504
When you are interpreting every counter-point as supporting your point, you're in MAGA land. You're asserting something unfalsifiable.Your reactions continue to prove my point.
I’ll say it once more: I’m arguing that Mamdani’s message, grounded in housing, transit, and care, cut across communities and helped him overcome red-baiting and a 1% starting point. You responded with borough trivia and personal insults. Why? Because I didn’t memorize a precinct map?
Let’s actually engage the argument. Yes, different boroughs voted differently. That’s true in every citywide race. It doesn’t disprove that material appeals helped Mamdani surge, especially in places where the left has built real organizing infrastructure, like DSA in Brooklyn. And yes, some communities leaned toward Cuomo, for all kinds of reasons: residual name recognition, conservatism on certain issues, lack of engagement by Mamdani’s campaign. That’s called politics.
But you’re twisting basic electoral variation into a gotcha, as if a left candidate needs to sweep every borough for his message to be taken seriously. He was outspent, red-baited, and still won a high-turnout primary in the nation’s media capital. That’s a crack in the narrative you’ve spent this thread defending. And it scares you, so now it’s about me and my supposed ignorance.
I’m not embarrassed. But you seem awfully defensive.
It's not borough trivia. It gets to the heart of your analysis. If Mamdani ran on bus fares, then it would make sense that Greenwood would overwhelmingly turn out for him -- because Greenwood is inaccessible by subway. By contrast, East New York is well served by subway. So those two data points support the idea that the mass transit issue resonated. That's a point in your favor.
But does it also follow that the rent freeze was a big deal? Well, one way we could measure that is by plotting rents and Mamdani support. Maybe you'd expect that the places with high rents would go for Mamdani? Except that doesn't appear to be true, at first glance. I'm not seeing a lot of correlation. Bed Stuy is full of large multi-bedroom apartments that aren't rent stabilized; lots of young people get together and rent huge 6 bedroom places to save money. It went for Mamdami. Same with Park Slope (where Cuomo ran worst). But some of the places that would be most affected -- e.g. the older neighborhoods of Manhattan, and importantly, the Bronx-- didn't go for Mamdami.
So with some knowledge of NYC, you can arrive at a working hypothesis that the bus issue was important and the rent issue either less so or actually hurt him. I mean, this is an eyeball analysis; to be sure, we'd need to crunch some numbers. But we can at least get close with some knowledge of the city.
Wanna know why Cuomo ran better in the Bronx than Brooklyn? Well, there are comparatively more Jewish areas there. Brooklyn has some Jewish neighborhoods, but they are overwhelmed by other ethnicities borough-wide. So that supports the idea that some of the voting was about the war, as posters have claimed. And in particular, the Jewish neighborhoods in the Bronx voted for Cuomo by large margins.
Get the point now? Stop trying to lecture New Yorkers about what happened in New York City because you have no idea what you're talking about.
I'm not worried about any "crack in the narrative." I go with the truth. If new evidence emerges that challenges my narrative, then I change the narrative. But you've got to interpret the evidence correctly, which you simply cannot do without statistics or working knowledge of the area.