Mamdani is a disaster

[gatomontes99]

After the last snow storm was an unmitigated disaster with snow not being removed, trash not being collected and homeless dying in droves, Mamdani has a new idea: pay people to dig themselves out. 
 

Quote

Washington Examiner

The paperwork Mamdani referenced included “two small photos (1-½ inch square), two original forms of ID, plus copies, and a social security card.” The requirements were notable given the recent debate over proposed voter ID laws such as the SAVE Act. Democrats have regularly claimed that identification requirements are challenging to obtain for lower-income Americans, racial minorities, and, in some cases, women. 

How hypocritical of him. Getting an ID is too hard for black and brown people but getting 2 IDs, a social security card and two printed passport photos is easy enough to make $19/hr. 

But no one applied. Not one. So they upped the pay:

Quote

NBC

The account for the historic snowfall, Mamdani said the city would now be paying emergency shovelers $30 an hour, almost $10 more than previously offered

Never mind that 30 - 19 is not almost 10. That is of no co sequence. Lol

[John Stone]

NYC is over 300 billion in debt and has a deficit of around 15 billion. 

Like any Liberal the idea is deficit spending 

A guy like this is a Lib on steroids re: spending. 

[CdnFox]

Mamdani is a disaster. The sun is hot. The ocean is deep in some parts. Mountains are tall   

I mean it barely qualifies as news. Of course he's a disaster. It'll be interesting to see if New Yorkers catch on or if they just keep diluting themselves right into the ground

[John Stone]

8 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Mamdani is a disaster. The sun is hot. The ocean is deep in some parts. Mountains are tall   

I mean it barely qualifies as news. Of course he's a disaster. It'll be interesting to see if New Yorkers catch on or if they just keep diluting themselves right into the ground

Mamdani ran on a  platform that telegraphed how he was going to govern .......

The strategy of deficit spending, combined with a crushing debt is arguably criminal.

More the pity is that deficit spending saddles future generations with debt.......... higher taxation..........  

Political hacks would rather sign the cheque, stay incumbent and punt. 

Becoming a far too typical approach ........... and  increasingly less fiscal room when an $concern arises. 

[Hodad]

11 hours ago, John Stone said:

NYC is over 300 billion in debt and has a deficit of around 15 billion. 

Like any Liberal the idea is deficit spending 

A guy like this is a Lib on steroids re: spending. 

Not sure why you would describe this as "Lib" anything. Republicans are the undisputed kings of deficit spending. Have been since Reagan. 🤷‍♂️ Trump's dead set on being #1 at something. This could be his category.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, John Stone said:

Mamdani ran on a  platform that telegraphed how he was going to govern .......

The strategy of deficit spending, combined with a crushing debt is arguably criminal.

More the pity is that deficit spending saddles future generations with debt.......... higher taxation..........  

Political hacks would rather sign the cheque, stay incumbent and punt. 

Becoming a far too typical approach ........... and  increasingly less fiscal room when an $concern arises. 

I think it's horrible but the problem is the very first line that you said. This is what he ran on and people voted for it.

As is often said people get the government they deserve. I think it was absolutely criminal that they chose to vote for this guy but they did and that's democracy

[Hodad]

13 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

After the last snow storm was an unmitigated disaster with snow not being removed, trash not being collected and homeless dying in droves, Mamdani has a new idea: pay people to dig themselves out. 
 

How hypocritical of him. Getting an ID is too hard for black and brown people but getting 2 IDs, a social security card and two printed passport photos is easy enough to make $19/hr. 

But no one applied. Not one. So they upped the pay:

Never mind that 30 - 19 is not almost 10. That is of no co sequence. Lol

He's a disaster--and a hypocrite--because he's following existing labor and employment laws? 

I provided a detailed reply in the other thread, but the net-net is that this is a completely imaginary hypocrisy. Dumb.

[Nationalist]

2 hours ago, Hodad said:

Not sure why you would describe this as "Lib" anything. Republicans are the undisputed kings of deficit spending. Have been since Reagan. 🤷‍♂️ Trump's dead set on being #1 at something. This could be his category.

Hole sh1t it this stupid.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Hole sh1t it this stupid.

^Drinking EARLY, AGAIN. LMAO

[WestCanMan]

17 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

After the last snow storm was an unmitigated disaster with snow not being removed, trash not being collected and homeless dying in droves, Mamdani has a new idea: pay people to dig themselves out. 

The lesbian in charge of those things clearly needs a raise.

Quote

How hypocritical of him. Getting an ID is too hard for black and brown people but getting 2 IDs, a social security card and two printed passport photos is easy enough to make $19/hr. 

He didn't expect of of them to do any of the work. They're too busy with their daycare scams.

Quote

But no one applied. Not one. 

People didn't vote for Mamdani just to end up working, duh.

They're sitting at home waiting for the billionaire's tax to make their lives perfect. 

WTF, are you new here? 

[Shady]

6 hours ago, Hodad said:

He's a disaster--and a hypocrite--because he's following existing labor and employment laws? 

I provided a detailed reply in the other thread, but the net-net is that this is a completely imaginary hypocrisy. Dumb.

I thought requiring ID is racist?

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, Shady said:

I thought requiring ID is racist?

No, you didn't. You thought it would be clever to say. It isn't. Rather, it just highlights gaps in your knowledge and thinking. 

The requirement to show ID to get a job has nothing to do with the mayor of NYC. It's a federal law. 

Ignorant people like the OP think that this is some kind of hypocrisy on the part of the mayor, when it's a federal requirement.

 

[Shady]

9 minutes ago, Hodad said:

No, you didn't. You thought it would be clever to say. It isn't. Rather, it just highlights gaps in your knowledge and thinking. 

The requirement to show ID to get a job has nothing to do with the mayor of NYC. It's a federal law. 

Ignorant people like the OP think that this is some kind of hypocrisy on the part of the mayor, when it's a federal requirement.

 

But I thought requiring ID is voter suppression?  So why isn’t this employment suppression?  

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, Shady said:

But I thought requiring ID is voter suppression?  So why isn’t this employment suppression?  

Again, whether it is or it isn't, it would have nothing to do with the mayor of NYC. 💡

[gatomontes99]

9 hours ago, Hodad said:

No, you didn't. You thought it would be clever to say. It isn't. Rather, it just highlights gaps in your knowledge and thinking. 

The requirement to show ID to get a job has nothing to do with the mayor of NYC. It's a federal law. 

Ignorant people like the OP think that this is some kind of hypocrisy on the part of the mayor, when it's a federal requirement.

 

So why hasn't anyone, including Mamdani, ever called the law that requires ID to get a job, racist? 

Oh, right, because it is not. That means the argument that the SAVE Act is racist is bullshit on top of being insulting. 

[Hodad]

4 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

So why hasn't anyone, including Mamdani, ever called the law that requires ID to get a job, racist? 

Oh, right, because it is not. That means the argument that the SAVE Act is racist is bullshit on top of being insulting. 

Jeebus, I know you saw a meme on Twitter that implied that showed you a false equivalency and you swallowed it whole, but try to think it through.

I9 requirements date back to the Reagan era immigration reform and were specifically created as a response to undocumented Mexican laborers. OF COURSE people called it racist. That indeed was part of the motive, though there are practical concerns as well. But that's like 40 years ago. Mamdani wasn't even born yet.🙄

Beyond that, access to a job and to a constitutional right are two very different things. Do you really need me to list the ways these scenarios are very different--from motives to execution to outcome. Why don't you quit meming and take a shot? Make your best argument for why the employment and voting situations are not very similar. Think it through and surprise yourself. Or, you know, just post more crap from Twitter. It's a (mostly) free country.

 

[WestCanMan]

5 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

So why hasn't anyone, including Mamdani, ever called the law that requires ID to get a job, racist? 

Or food stamps.

If people had to choose between eating and voting, they'd all eat, but you need ID to get food stamps. 

Leftards: "Anything we don't like is racist! Not cheering for a genocide of Israelis is racist!"

[CdnFox]

14 hours ago, Hodad said:

No, you didn't. You thought it would be clever to say. It isn't. Rather, it just highlights gaps in your knowledge and thinking. 

The requirement to show ID to get a job has nothing to do with the mayor of NYC. It's a federal law. 

Ignorant people like the OP think that this is some kind of hypocrisy on the part of the mayor, when it's a federal requirement.

 

Funny, it was 5 minutes ago when we were discussing trump making it mandatory

[gatomontes99]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Jeebus, I know you saw a meme on Twitter that implied that showed you a false equivalency and you swallowed it whole, but try to think it through.

I9 requirements date back to the Reagan era immigration reform and were specifically created as a response to undocumented Mexican laborers. OF COURSE people called it racist. That indeed was part of the motive, though there are practical concerns as well. But that's like 40 years ago. Mamdani wasn't even born yet.🙄

Lol, well...I don't doubt YOU would call it racist. But that act legalized all illegal immigrants and gave them status. It was not called racist. 

 

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Beyond that, access to a job and to a constitutional right are two very different things.

Of course they are. But we are not talking about that. We are talking about access to IDs and the left's assumption that nonwhites can't possibly figure out how to get one or afford one or whatever racist trope the wannabe white saviors of the left are schlepping this week. 

 

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Do you really need me to list the ways these scenarios are very different--from motives to execution to outcome. Why don't you quit meming and take a shot? Make your best argument for why the employment and voting situations are not very similar

Well pick one. Do you want to know how they are similar or not? You really are melting down here trying to make this strawman stand up. 

The argument is whether or not nonwhites are smart enough, or have enough money or whatever, to get an ID. That is your side's argument. It is not my fault it is a shifty and racist argument. You made it. You tell us how that is sane. 

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

It's a (mostly) free country.

But you are working on fixing that, right? You want a way to suppress me and people like me? That is what Biden tried to do. Maybe the next brain-dead, octonarian, Manchurian candidate can be more successful. 

Edited February 25 by gatomontes99

[Deluge]

On 2/24/2026 at 9:10 AM, Hodad said:

Not sure why you would describe this as "Lib" anything. Republicans are the undisputed kings of deficit spending. Have been since Reagan. 🤷‍♂️ Trump's dead set on being #1 at something. This could be his category.

Mamdani is a f*cking communist and he has power over the country's most important city. This is a "lib" thing, not a Republican thing. 

[Shady]

[Reg Volk]

The New York Post has been having a field day with all of Mamdani's insane actions and stupidity.  It's been an enjoyable read:

https://nypost.com/2026/02/25/us-news/mayor-zohran-mamdani-doubles-down-on-downplaying-nypd-snowball-attack/

https://nypost.com/2026/02/25/us-news/mamdani-wants-nyc-to-spend-70m-on-feasibility-study-for-city-run-grocery-store-pet-project-sources/

This guy continues to be the biggest weapon the Republicans have, other than the twin idjuts AOC and Crockett.

[Hodad]

6 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Lol, well...I don't doubt YOU would call it racist. But that act legalized all illegal immigrants and gave them status. It was not called racist. 

 

Of course they are. But we are not talking about that. We are talking about access to IDs and the left's assumption that nonwhites can't possibly figure out how to get one or afford one or whatever racist trope the wannabe white saviors of the left are schlepping this week. 

 

Well pick one. Do you want to know how they are similar or not? You really are melting down here trying to make this strawman stand up. 

The argument is whether or not nonwhites are smart enough, or have enough money or whatever, to get an ID. That is your side's argument. It is not my fault it is a shifty and racist argument. You made it. You tell us how that is sane. 

But you are working on fixing that, right? You want a way to suppress me and people like me? That is what Biden tried to do. Maybe the next brain-dead, octonarian, Manchurian candidate can be more successful. 

Accepting this as your concession that no, you're not up to the task of critically examining the similarities and differences. You prefer to stick with memeing. 

Open wide, here comes the airplane!

1. The standards--legal, moral and practical--are necessarily different to infringe upon a constitutional right than to infringe upon other opportunities. Always has been. Always will. The entirety of American jurisprudence bears that out. So what lawmakers can "get away with" in the consequential compromise of liberty will be different. 

2. Yes, you nitwit, people absolutely did object to the law on grounds of racial bias. Just because it Twitter didn't exist doesn't mean it didn't happen. Crack a book. Use the internet. Whatever it takes to learn something before you pontificate on the subject. 

3. You need to prove eligibility to work in the same way that you need to prove eligibility to register to vote--both before participating in the actual activity. Same principle.

4. After demonstrating eligibility and registering, you can show up and work or show up and vote without further documentation. You don't need to produce ID after registering. That too is the same.

5. However, if you forget your ID when proving eligibility to work you can simply do it later. It is not a time bound process. Requiring ID to vote on the day of voting is a time bound process. There is just one point in tim--one opportunity--to exercise your constitutional right, and it should not be infringed upon unless there is very good cause. That is different.

6. There are wildly different cost/benefit analyses. Taking a job provides a strong and ongoing financial incentive to break the law. There is virtually no reward for attempting voter impersonation fraud--and very high risk. There's another difference. 

7. Employment (due to federal income taxation) is within the purview of the federal government. Whereas the states are constitutionally responsible for creating their own respective election laws. That's a difference.

8. We know for a fact that many undocumented immigrants were lying about eligibility and affecting impersonations to secure work and wages, therefore a corrective law can bejustified and we all trade away some liberty to pass that corrective law.  In contrast, we know for a fact that voter impersonation fraud is virtually nonexistent. There is no problem to solve, and therefore there is no justification for a law that will disenfranchise even a small number of Americans on voting day. 

That's plenty for now, but that last one is the kicker. When you now for a fact that you are going to disenfranchise some American, when there is no problem to solve and no upside to the disenfranchisement, it reveals that ulterior motives are in play. 

Finally, the idea that nonwhites are not smart enough or too poor to get IDs the only strawman in this conversation. "We" didn't say that. You a-holes made that up. What we did say is that it's an observable demographic fact that marginalized people--including minorities--are less likely to have ID. Regardless of why you think that is (whatever racist reasons you keep claiming) the facts are the facts. And when you're cheering for a law that you know will disproportionately disenfranchise those people and secure us nothing in return, it's clearly racial targeting. That's the motive. Because of the demographic alignment between the parties, you think the disenfranchisement will hurt Democrats more than Republicans. That's the selfish, cynical, vile upside to this whole thing for you. It's the exact same "thining" that drives Republican controlled states to continually reduce polling places in predominately Black districts--because many people can't or won't wait in line for 6 hours to vote. 

You can lie and strawman as much as you like, but facts are facts. You're trying to sell us a VERY false equivalency. It's dumb. Not as dumb as trying to blame the mayor of NYC for a federal law, but still pretty dumb. And I'm not buying.  

Edited February 26 by Hodad

[User]

6 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Open wide, here comes the airplane!

It’s comical how you act like this while you are a coward hiding from me. 

[gatomontes99]

6 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Accepting this as your concession that no, you're not up to the task of critically examining the similarities and differences. You prefer to stick with memeing. 

Lol...still tilting at that strawman? Why? Is it because you don't have a way to explain that your side is using racist tropes to justify their opposition to a bill that is supported by well over 80% of Americans? 

18 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Open wide, here comes the airplane!

You really like your strawman. 

 

20 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Finally, the idea that nonwhites are not smart enough or too poor to get IDs the only strawman in this conversation. "We" didn't say that. You a-holes made that up.

You didn't say that? Are you fùcking kidding me?

Jim Crow is the defacto reference when the left wants to call a law discriminatory against blacks. Saying that the SAVE Act discriminates against blacks must imply they are too stupid or too poor. Why else would they not be able to get an ID?