By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Zohran Mamdani has been declared the next mayor of New York City, making history as the first Muslim mayor, the first Democratic Socialists of America member since David Dinkins, and one of the youngest to hold the position. Despite polling at only 1% in February, Mamdani secured an impressive victory against former Governor Andrew Cuomo, who garnered support from numerous billionaires. The campaign showcased a stark contrast between Mamdani’s optimistic approach and Cuomo’s desperate tactics, including racially charged attacks and an embrace of Trump’s endorsement. This outcome reveals the misjudgment of Cuomo’s billionaire backers and their ineffective strategy in attempting to influence the election.
Read the original article here
America’s Dumbest Billionaires Fail to Stop Zohran Mamdani: Let’s dive right in, shall we? It seems like a recent political victory has really ruffled some feathers in the gilded cage. The story, as I gather it, centers on a certain Zohran Mamdani, and the rather spectacular failure of some very wealthy individuals to prevent his success. It’s a fascinating case study in how money, even vast sums of it, doesn’t always translate into influence.
You see, the narrative here is pretty straightforward: a group of billionaires, presumably worried about Mamdani’s policies, particularly those involving taxation, threw a significant amount of money at trying to thwart his political ambitions. Their efforts, however, appear to have been in vain. It’s almost comical, isn’t it? These titans of industry, used to bending reality to their will, suddenly finding themselves unable to stop a candidate who, by all accounts, was offering a vision of the future that resonated with a different set of values. It just goes to show you that a good candidate with good policies that people want will win.
The frustration is palpable, even if the exact numbers spent are a little fuzzy. One commentator mentioned a laundry list of names – Michael Bloomberg, the Lauder family, Joe Gebbia from Airbnb, Bill Ackman, Barry Diller, Steve Wynn, Alice Walton, and Laurie Tisch – each throwing in significant sums. The implication is clear: these individuals were betting big against Mamdani, and they lost. And lost spectacularly.
The reasons behind this failure are probably complex, but some key factors are repeatedly mentioned. First, there’s the observation that Mamdani appears to be a good candidate, someone who’s relatable, likable, and actually has policies that people want. They’re not just offering vague promises or relying on name recognition; they’re articulating a clear vision for the future. And that’s pretty attractive to voters. Secondly, there’s a sense that the DNC, or at least elements within it, might not be as supportive of candidates like Mamdani as they should be. The idea is that the party establishment sometimes favors “goofy lame dipshits” who have been around forever, rather than embracing the energy and ideas of younger, more dynamic figures.
The core of the matter seems to be that money alone can’t buy you popularity or political success. As the saying goes, you can’t buy a personality, and these billionaires, despite their wealth, often lack the genuine connection with people that makes a candidate truly effective. The irony, of course, is that they’re so desperate to be liked, to be seen as something other than what they are, and the money they throw around only serves to highlight that disconnect.
And there is certainly a sense of, perhaps, schadenfreude? People seem to revel in the idea of these wealthy individuals being unable to get what they want. There’s a certain satisfaction in seeing the rich and powerful brought down a peg or two, especially when their efforts seem so out of touch with the concerns of ordinary people. It’s hard to ignore the inherent contradiction. These are individuals who are supposedly the embodiment of success in our society, and yet their actions, in this case, seem to demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of what people really want.
There’s also a clear undercurrent of frustration with the status quo. The feeling that the DNC is out of touch, that the system is rigged, and that the interests of the wealthy are prioritized over the needs of the working class. The idea is that the old guard within the Democratic party are more interested in appeasing wealthy donors than in promoting the policies that would actually benefit the average citizen.
The discussions about tax increases, like the mention of a 2% increase or even a hypothetical 50% one, show the core of the issue. The wealthy seem so terrified of paying their fair share, and the response is often to threaten to leave the country. The sentiment is, why should we care?
There’s even a suggestion that if Democrats win in 2028, there might be a call for retribution against the billionaire class. This could include a wealth tax, taxes on CEO bonuses, and increased scrutiny from the IRS. It’s a clear indication of how frustrated people are with the current economic system and the power wielded by the very wealthy. The general consensus appears to be that the billionaire class will always interfere with our lives if we allow them to keep their wealth.
The broader point here is that this specific political event is just a symptom of a much larger problem. It’s a battle in a war that is being overly dominated by the few.