r/videos • u/ControlCAD • 1d ago
NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Abdul El-Sayed: "When you think of Dr. El-Sayed's campaign, money in your pocket, Medicare for all. His victory is of critical importance to our city, because what it indicates is willingness to chart a new course in Washington that has working people at the heart of it."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=2DIbQU97hxM96
u/Kinggambit90 1d ago
I don't care if a banana with a wig was running, I'd still choose the banana if I get Medicare for all and money out of politics. Sayed not being a pushover and a staunch opponent for the people, all the people is bonus points
25
u/r3dditr0x 1d ago
There's a reason why all the oligarchs and tv networks are aligned against him.
MSNow and Fox and CNN all put out lying hit pieces on him. Sitting Democrats put out smears on him. Neera, the bum, Tanden continuously puts out hit pieces on him.
But Abdul's only getting stronger.
3
u/asscracktester7 1d ago edited 1d ago
I’m not sure you can say the Democrat party is against him when he’s received the 2nd highest amount of TV money from the DNC after Talarico and Obama himself is out campaigning for AES
1
u/asscracktester7 1d ago
Same. I don’t really give af about a senator as a person or their religion or what problematic organization they have family ties to or any unsavory stuff about them said on the news - all that matters is which policies they will vote “Yes” for in DC (and taking away a conservative vote)
4
63
u/Strawbuddy 1d ago
It's important to flood the zone with impressive, progressive candidates with brown skin and foreign names, so average Americans can see that there's no jihad, no Sharia laws, and no radicalism, just 21st century ideas and ethics, from people that aren't frail, multimillionaire octogenarians
-11
u/HangryBeaver 1d ago
This is super racist.
1
u/hedoeswhathewants 1d ago
"Foreign names" is a little bit, but otherwise it's kind of not
6
u/HangryBeaver 1d ago
Maybe the best people should be elected regardless of name origin or skin color.
2
0
u/spiddly_spoo 21h ago edited 20h ago
They are describing how many americans may feel about these guys. Whether they are honest with themselves or not many people may see their darker skin and their names and think foreign scary Muslim etc. This is indeed super racist. So it's great that people with these implicit or maybe explicit biases see Abdul and Zohran don't fit their prejudice.
Edit: Or I am now considering maybe you meant it's racist to say brown people should be running for office because it would be racist to say any specific skin color category of people should run for office? If so, I don't believe the sentiment is competent white people shouldn't run for office or that brown people should run at the expense of more competent white people. Just that wouldn't it be nice for Americans to have less prejudice against Arab, brown, or Muslim people and see people more as individuals consciously or subconsciously.
Edit 2: I think no matter what the politician with the best policies and who is most competent should win. I do think that for a certain progressive or liberal subset of the populace a candidate not being white makes them seem more likely to be competent and empathetic and have policies better for non-billionaires because they are perceived as not being coddled by white supremacy and to have suffered or seen more hardships to understand what people need. But then many people have a different worldview where white supremacy is way overblown and appears in fringe extremist groups and everyone basically has equal footing since the civil rights act so to cheer specifically for brown candidates is unproductive and unfair. And DEI programs coddled non white people in an arena that was already fair making non white people potentially less competent. I personally think that the civil rights act didn't immediately create a level playing field, but made it the official goal on paper and there was plenty of white supremacist momentum that has carried on straight to today. But, and maybe I am naive, I don't think racist people are evil little gremlins that we should all spew hatred at. Most everyone is on the white supremacist spectrum, it's just the ocean we swim in and spewing vitriol at someone more racist than you to feel morally superior is not the way and guilt tripping someone for being caught in the matrix is also not the way. Anyway, just a snapshot of my state of mind. I apologize to anyone who actually read through all of this, it's way too long
-8
u/SpecialBeginning6430 23h ago
Especially when he campaigns with someone who thinks America deserves 9/11
-6
u/Dahrk25 20h ago
Actually what Abdul el-sayed and Mamdani are doing is following sharia law. Obeying the law of the land is part of sharia law. So a British Muslim has to follow the UK law.
Unless its a Muslim majority country, Islamic sharia laws doesn't become the default and even if it does certain laws(those laws are generally stricter) don't apply to non Muslims.
7
u/WalidfromMorocco 16h ago
Obeying the law of the land is part of sharia law. So a British Muslim has to follow the UK law.
I have nothing against Mamdani or Abdul el-sayed but that isn't true. I'm not saying that they want to enact Sharia law, because obviously they don't, and I'm not saying that Muslims don't follow the law, but Sharia law, in the strict sense, doesn't want you to follow a law that is not ordained by God. There are Muslims who don't even vote because it's against Sharia to appoint a non Muslim as ruler over you. A British Muslim has to follow the law because it's common sense, and most Muslims have the common sense to do so, but it is not part of Sharia lol
4
u/Strawbuddy 20h ago
You're right but it's a buzzword here in the US, like socialism, one that conservative politicians use as a boogeyman, and a few conservative states have legislation preventing Sharia law from being imposed, despite that not even being a thing. Racists don't make any distinctions about ethnic groups here, they hate and fear them all equally
-8
2
-2
u/scriptingends 1d ago
And why tf not? 90% of Americans hate what’s happening right now. But you’re still gonna vote for the same, geriatric, “picture that comes with the frame” old fossils? How fucking stupid are we? Give the new generation a chance - you already know what the alternative is…
-7
u/Schmice 1d ago
What he needs to explain is his mother's activism for the Muslim Brotherhood, which was also noted in deleted tweets by El-Sayed's sister. I hope everyone on reddit who is vehemently against the far right (and rightly so) understand that Islam is the foremost far right ideology. That's why it's so important to investigate these people to absolutely confirm that their allegiance.
6
1
0
-5
u/stillay 1d ago
Good thing we’re not voting for his mom. If this did actually happen, which I still haven’t seen any data that definitely shows it did it’s not even like he was alive.
Allegedly happened in the 70s. Was born in 84.
Plenty of people have differing views from their family members, but that’s all just conveniently ignored to justify people’s unfounded fears.
-8
u/SpecialBeginning6430 23h ago
we’re not voting for his mom
How much has his mother influenced his politics?
2
u/Rulligan 10h ago
Probably not much considering his parents divorced when he was 3, his dad had primary custody, and his mom left the state shortly after.
3
u/stillay 23h ago
Idk. Do you know? Or are we making assumptions
2
u/SpecialBeginning6430 23h ago
Thats prolly why we should ask him
1
u/Hoobleton 16h ago
He's explained his own politics with respect to the Muslim Brotherhood.
-3
u/SpecialBeginning6430 14h ago
Yeah and when asked to criticise the IRGC he went on this schpiel without criticising the IRGC
3
u/no_offenc 13h ago
How did you move that goalpost so quickly
1
0
u/SpecialBeginning6430 12h ago
I mean someone who denounces the MB should have no problem denouncing the IRGC
1
u/The_Power_Of_Three 6h ago
His mom who divorced when he was three and left the state? Probably not so much. Also... He's a politician. If you want to know how politics, they are public, you don't need to infer from his parents you silly goose.
•
u/SpecialBeginning6430 1h ago
The Middle East Forum (Focus on Western Islamism) published a compilation of 44 clips drawn from the Islamic Center of Detroit’s (ICD) own social media/videos over the past three years. The clips show imams and prayer leaders making repeated supplications including: “O Allah, count them, kill them one by one, and leave none of them.” Calls to “eradicate them from existence,” “annihilate every single soldier,” “orphan their children,” “curse them, tear them apart, and burn them,” and similar language directed at “aggressor Zionists,” Israelis/soldiers, or in the context of Gaza/jihad. meforum.org MEF states it found over 400 examples of violent or extremist rhetoric at the ICD (praise for jihadists/mujahideen, etc.). The quoted phrases match standard Arabic-language qunut/supplication formulas used in some mosques during conflicts; the compilation attributes them directly to ICD speakers in public recordings.
The Middle East Forum (Focus on Western Islamism) published a compilation of 44 clips drawn from the Islamic Center of Detroit’s (ICD) own social media/videos over the past three years. The clips show imams and prayer leaders making repeated supplications including: “O Allah, count them, kill them one by one, and leave none of them.” Calls to “eradicate them from existence,” “annihilate every single soldier,” “orphan their children,” “curse them, tear them apart, and burn them,” and similar language directed at “aggressor Zionists,” Israelis/soldiers, or in the context of Gaza/jihad. MEF states it found over 400 examples of violent or extremist rhetoric at the ICD (praise for jihadists/mujahideen, etc.). The quoted phrases match standard Arabic-language qunut/supplication formulas used in some mosques during conflicts; the compilation attributes them directly to ICD speakers in public recordings.
-9
u/DXsocko007 23h ago
Islam is not a far right Ideology. It’s much worse. They are literally using the left to get voted in to take over and ruin things. The left is too afraid to say “no islams” because it’s “racist” it’s “Islamophobia” when it’s not. It’s simply we love democracy and freedom. We don’t want that. If you come to our country it’s to be an American not to make our country you’re.
Back to Islam being Right wing and why I disagree the right won’t murder you for an abortion, they won’t murder you for being gay, they won’t throw acid on your face or kill and grape your kids for not being right wing.
Most people on the right aren’t as insane as what Reddit makes them out to be. You would be shocked how kind and accepting most are. What you see online is either bots to fuel your anger or stuff addressed to you to make you hate the other party. When you get to know the people you’d see how insanely level headed and full of love they have for EVERYONE.
Sure you find those who think trump is god but for the most part many right wing people can’t stand Trump. But like a close border and making America first.
-9
u/objectlesson 1d ago
You think Islam in toto is further to the right than Evangelicalism? Were you dropped on your head as a baby?
0
u/asscracktester7 1d ago
Tbf Evangelicalism is a lot more specific than Islam as a whole. If you want to compare apples to apples, you’d want to compare Evangelicalism to one of the most extreme/fundamentalist Islamic sects (given that Evangelicalism is one of the most extreme/fundamentalist Christian sects)
3
u/SpecialBeginning6430 23h ago
Do we have evangelical suicide bombers.
0
u/asscracktester7 23h ago
No but we have Evangelicals funding Israel’s bombing campaigns. They just have more means than the Islamists and don’t have to commit the acts of terror directly themselves.
2
u/SpecialBeginning6430 23h ago
How did Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis and Iraqi PMFs end up with billions in weaponry with no military industrial complex to speak of?
How is Hezbollah stronger than the Lebanese state? How are Houthis able to shoot missiles into Saudi Arabia being that theyre just a nation of farmers and fishermen?
1
u/asscracktester7 22h ago
Iran is probably my best guess. But once again, not sure of your point. Just because I can see Evangelicals funding terrorism/violence doesn’t mean I can’t see Islamists funding terrorism/violence or doing it themselves.
1
u/objectlesson 1d ago
Well the comment I responded to didn't make that distinction. I picked a far right religious ideology as a mode of comparison. Evangelicalism is more or less identical to the most extreme Islamic sects. Doesn't matter because he's a reactionary bigot either way.
-9
u/asscracktester7 1d ago edited 1d ago
Every leftist already knows how problematic Islam is. Not wanting people of certain religions to be discriminated against doesn’t mean we support those religions. We’re not fans of any religion, let alone Abrahamic ones in particular. But AES has grown up in the US and shown no indication that he will place his religion over his politics, which is all that matters at the end of the day.
3
u/ultimate_avacado 23h ago
Every leftist already knows how problematic Islam is.
You sure about that?
"Leftist" is a VERYbroad tent.
1
-6
u/Jagator 14h ago
I’m still not crazy about the fact that he didn’t publicly distance himself from Hassan Piker until after his political career started taking off and it became clear it was a political liability. You couple that with his mother’s past and his sister’s comments (deleted) and it’s really hard to not believe there is influence there. Politicians aren’t exactly known for being the most truthful people.
I honestly think you’d have to be incredibly naive to believe otherwise.
3
u/ShleepMasta 14h ago
Well, it's the opposite. Opposing factions within the party want Hasan to be a liability, so they smear him while simultaneously waterboarding every Democrat into denouncing him. People who have bills to pay don't know or care.
0
u/Jagator 13h ago
He smears himself, what are you talking about? You do realize there are multiple records, videos/recordings, of his extremely controversial comments right? There are equally many records of their relationship prior to El-Sayed’s political popularity. Don’t be ignorant because Reddit says it’s a lie. This is the most biased and censored social media site on the planet.
5
u/Rulligan 10h ago
I enjoy the fact that people feel the need for AES to distance himself from a streamer in California and then ignore the fact that Mike Rogers has the support of the pedophile, felonious president.
0
u/Jagator 10h ago
Both things are true. This isn’t hard to accept, but for some reason it seems that way for Reddit.
1
u/mattattaxx 7h ago
You only seem to care about the streamer, but the streamer hasn't done anything wrong, certainly not to the level of a literal pedophile.
Both sides nonsense as usual.
1
u/ShleepMasta 8h ago
I don't doubt that there are individuals, such as yourself, who personally have issues with Hasan. But polls have been done on this. He just isn't well known by the electorate. People who have lives aren't aneurysmally obsessing over his every word.
My point is that, to the extent that Hasan becomes popular and a liability, it will correspond with the big stink his detractors within the party establishment try to make about him, not the reality of his statements. In other words, it's a deliberate self-fulfilling prophecy.
-1
-1
u/CMB1003 7h ago
"Elect me and we will give you free stuff!" Gets elected. "We cant give you that free stuff we promised because of (x,y,z, other political party), but elect us again and we will!" Gets reelected "Well you see what happened was..." And do it all over again.
How many people can fall for the same trick over and over?
-39
u/SnoozingBasset 1d ago edited 1d ago
How are we supposed to have free healthcare for. All & pay for it?
EDIT: I can see what I wrote is unpopular.
I object to the treatment that dissent should be shouted down. That only demonstrates a lack of substance to that viewpoint.
The amount of money sent to Israel will not offset the cost of universal healthcare. People were upset by Orange Guy cutting programs. If those are reinstated, there will be less money for healthcare.
The insurance companies, pharmacy companies, & some doctors will oppose it. It will mean a loss of profit for them. They will not go peacefully.
Taxing the rich will only work to a point. Unlike us poor working stiffs, they can take their money & leave.
In light of the above, & in the interest of holding someone accountable, I’d like some idea how it’s supposed to work. There are enough liars & grifters already.
22
u/sixxtoes 1d ago
Same as every other developed nation has already done. It's not actually free, it's covered by taxes. It is however significantly cheaper than the current US system.
4
u/r3dditr0x 1d ago
Found Jake Tapper's burner.
(always mad when Americans want something from their government, but delighted when we send $ to Israel)
0
4
u/DarmokNJelad-Tanagra 1d ago
Bro we already paying for it we just ain't getting it, ffs people are such morons. (Or bots)
15
u/servermeta_net 1d ago
Hello bot, the money spent to support Israel in the war against Iran would more than fund medicare. Or you prefer trump who balloons the debt to enrich his friends?
0
u/utterscrub 1d ago
I’m a vociferous proponent of universal healthcare but what you’re claiming is so far from true it borders on farcical. Like the difference is in orders of magnitude. It hurts the cause to make idiotic claims.
-11
u/PeeFarts 1d ago edited 1d ago
I would love to see the math-ma-magic you’d have to use to even come close to finding healthcare using the money we send to Israel or the debt increase —- combined
Edit: don’t forget that anyone can walk us thru the math on this by simply responding to this comment.
14
u/kingofclubstroy 1d ago
If the US were to implement something close to other first world country universal health care systems, average americans would pay substantially less, and get more. The money they pay would be labeled as "taxes", so there would be an increase in taxes, but they would be paying less money overall. Anyone asking "how are we going to pay for it?", as a actual argument and legit obstacle to implement, is being disingenuous. Ya'll approve increased spending to the pentagon each year that would cover it, and you don't bat an eye at that, but you cannot find the money whenever it comes to programs that benefit the people. Again, it would save money overall.
-5
u/PeeFarts 1d ago
Sure, but how is this a response to “the money spent on Israel would more than fund Medicare”?
That’s an incorrect and uninformed comment that I was addressing with my question, not “could the US afford healthcare for all”, which is obviously true, albeit, not from using the money that we send to Israel for aide. Not even close.
Being disingenuous goes both ways— in this case, it’s extremely disingenuous to say that the money used to aide Israel would “more than fund” Medicare.
Why even assert something that is so far from the truth unless the commenter was being disingenuous?
0
u/kingofclubstroy 1d ago
You could entirely fund from the debt increase, many times over… not from the yearly direct funding of isreal, but there is a portion of the pentagon budget that involves supporting Israel’s military and munitions via contracts and US military operations, that if cut may be able to cover, although I don’t have the numbers because the pentagon is a block box and a money sink that has not been successfully audited.
-5
u/PeeFarts 1d ago
Walk me thru the numbers then since I wasn’t the one to make that claim.
Explain how the money from the debt increase since Trump took office in 2017 (about $20T) and the funding we send to Israel per year (about $4T) gets us to “free” healthcare for all Americans.
A price tag that conservative estimates place at $35T in 10 years!
Walk me thru how we get there by simply cutting off funding to Israel and using the $20T that Trump (and Biden) has racked up over the last decade.
You can’t - because it’s not possible. You all just have a narrative you’ve jumped to and you don’t know how to get there.
And if someone calls your claim or your math into question, that makes that person a wrong from some reason.
5
u/Bob_Juan_Santos 1d ago
funny how most other developed nations are able to fund their health care using tax money.
must be all magic hocus pocus then.
because obviously if YOU think it's impossible to do so, it definitely impossible to do so.
-1
u/PeeFarts 1d ago edited 1d ago
Why is it so difficult to respond to the points I’m making STRICTLY about (Debt Increase + Israel Funding) being enough to cover the cost of Free Healthcare?
Did I say it’s impossible? Or did I say it can’t be done simply by stopping funding to Israel and using the increase in debt since 2017?
You understand the point I’m making right? You get that I’m not saying that free healthcare is bad, or impossible, or harmful right? Because you read my comments before you responded right?
As I said before, you guys get a narrative in your head (that you learned from Reddit to be clear) and you don’t know how to defend your position because you never once got there using logic to begin with.
It’s a narrative that vibes with you and that’s why you can’t walk me thru the math or why you’re not even capable of even addressing my specific points.
Because you’ve come to a conclusion without getting there using facts or information that wasn’t regurgitated to you by someone from social media comments sections.
1
u/Bob_Juan_Santos 1d ago edited 1d ago
well, you're more than welcome to ask the developed countries that have single payer healthcare and find out how they do it.
who know, it might be hocus pocus in the end after all.
I dunno why you keep asking randos on reddit for that math. people on here support universal health care because it works and is proven to work in other countries that are much poorer than the USA. Heck, my country had it since the 60s and while it certainly could use some improvements, all in all it's been a boon to the citizens.
→ More replies3
u/kingofclubstroy 1d ago
You are misunderstanding tho, Americans would be paying in increased taxes, no matter how you slice it. The net difference in payments from current average non-tax payments to increased taxes to cover universal health care would result in Americans paying less, estimated to lower health expenditures by ~$400 billion to 1 trillion annually. There would be upfront cost to transition, be it infrastructure and covering for displaced workers that would be in the billions of dollars, but it all depends on how you want to calculate it, which is what I’m referring to. The overall point is that it’s a systems that would result in better care and less cost for the vast majority of Americans, and worth any initial cost. Major point is framing it as a cost/deficit issue is disingenuous, and arguments pushed by those that benefit from the current system.
-2
u/PeeFarts 1d ago
And yet you still are completly incapable of walking me or anyone thru the numbers, after being prompted like 4 times now, and you still can’t address my specific argument.
For some reason, you keep responding but you can’t do the 2 simple things:
1.) explain the math and how you came to the conclusion
2.) how will ending the funding for Israel + using the debt increase from 2016 to now will cover the costs.Those are the only two arguments I’ve made but no one can seem to address them.
Because you came to this conclusion without getting there using facts or numbers. You got there because you are regurgitating what you’ve heard on social media platforms like Reddit.
2
u/kingofclubstroy 1d ago
Did you read my comment? Cost is paid for by Americans via tax, and the initial cost to implement/setup is minor, estimates vary but most say it’s in the billions, which is much less than the deficit increase from 2016, and even less then its increase since the turd took office. My first comment acknowledged that it was likely more than the yearly Israeli funding but may be less if you account for support via pentagon contracts and US military operations. My math is that billions are less than trillions in the case of deficit, and it may be less than the billions total that support Israel, but inconclusive. Again I’m talking about cost to transition, not making the claim that these expenses could cover the entirety of universal healthcare, that would be silly, and again is disingenuous framing of the issue if you are still talking about that. Every (other) first world county covers their universal healthcare via increased taxes, America would be no different.
I can’t help but get the sense you aren’t being serious,
Universal healthcare will save money, not cost money: https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/medicare-for-all-an-updated-coverage-and-budget-analysis/
→ More replies2
u/jammerpammerslammer 1d ago
No, the government should be able to compete with big health. It’s “if you can’t afford health insurance, you have an OPTION to use this federally funded health plan.” That by the way, will not be good. No social program is a luxury. But the biggest point is YOU CAN PAY FOR OR HAVE WHATEVER INSURANCE YOU WANT!
just give people a chance to be productive members of society
3
1
u/Rulligan 10h ago
It's a good thing that El-Sayed worked in the public health sector, has multiple medical degrees, and wrote a book on all of it. It's almost like he knows what he's talking about.
Meanwhile Rogers wants healthcare to get cheaper by forcing you to pay more upfront for standard care like physicals. Tell me how that fucking works.
1
u/mattattaxx 7h ago
Boils down to another "it won't be easy on day one, so we better not do it" ass take
349
u/bebopbrain 1d ago
El-Sayed has run a flawless campaign.
In the USA you always want to be the fresh "shake things up" candidate. Mike Rogers ain't that.