Jeffries praises Eric Adams in a statement

[themaguffin]

ugh.

NEW: Jeffries praises Eric Adams in a statement, saying he has "served courageously and authentically for decades" and that "meaningful progress has been made" during his mayoralty.

Says he will "publicly weigh in" on the mayoral race "well before the start of early voting.”

— Andrew Solender (@andrewsolender.bsky.social) 2025-09-28T18:27:04.786Z

[QueerDuck]

1. Jeffries was being courteous. People always say kind and flattering things about the dead, or when someone retires.

I wouldn't read too much into his word or over-analyze or hyper-parse them. It's easy for anyone to be offended if they search hard enough for something to be angry about. This is a nothing event that will be forgotten in 36 hours.

[themaguffin]

5. My intention isn't to parse. Yeah, this will fade away, but so will Adams. Jeffries did not need to comment really.

At the end of the day, it means little of course, same as his potential endorsement.

[W_HAMILTON]

13. They say Democrats can't message, but Democratic voters can't "politics."

You are exactly right. Jeffries didn't even endorse Adams back before he won his election for god's sake. Jeffries message is just politics and we need to stop hounding our Democrats when they play the game that has to be played.

Just like how everyone got on Jeffries for not endorsing Mamdani -- once again, Jeffries didn't endorse Adams last time around and there was no uproar about it -- and Schumer didn't endorse until late October, I believe, because that sort of endorsement provides more "oomph" when it's done closer to when people vote rather than the middle of the summer...

Know how Republicans said they wouldn't overturn Roe v Wade? Remember how the MAGA Supreme Court nominees played coy and said it was the law of the land and they would respect precedent? And then remember how once they got the power to do so, Roe v Wade was almost immediately overturned?

Yeah, we Democrats don't get to play that game because our voters turn on our Democrats when we try to do that. Just like saying "I'm gonna overturn Roe v Wade" wasn't a popular thing to say so Republicans didn't say it but we and they both knew they would once they had the power to. "I'm gonna pack the Courts, I'm gonna eliminate the filibuster, etc." also are not popular with the electorate as a whole, so politics-wise it makes sense not to commit to doing that -- and then doing it once you are elected and have the power to do so. But that whole "elected" part becomes the issue with Democrats because we have some that refuse to vote for Democrats if they don't hear them say these things that make them less likely to get elected to be able to accomplish them in the first place.

It's so stupid.

Democratic voters want """fighters""" whereas Republicans want winners. If you are """fighting""" for something and yet never achieve it, what has that """fighting""" accomplished?

[bigtree]

21. what people should realize is that good legislators are produced out of their scholastic abilities

...not their street fighting.

Not withstanding that it's absolutely bullshit when you compare the voice, inflection, forcefulness, sharpness, or whatever attribute of Jeffries (or Schumer) to actual leaders in recent and past history who not only were up to the task, but brought wisdom and depth to the petty political arena.

Just fucking bullshit. I listened to Nancy Pelosi swallow and hesitate through EVERY remark and response, and of course, it's the substance of their legislative action that makes the most difference, even as these performative expectations or perceived failings are just fodder for the media and others, especially when we're in the minority.

There should be some understanding that these are good and decent folks who have been advanced BY THEIR FELLOW DEMS in Congress to represent THEM in their legislative pursuits. Jeffries isn't self-appointed, and people who rag on him need to recognize that his leadership rests on the ability of the Dem caucus to agree, and for him to accept and carry out THEIR collective mandate.

Outside of that, he's responsive to his OWN constituency in NY.

You want entertainers, elect Trumps. You want an intelligent nation that is committed to progressive change, then elect intelligent people committed to learned ideas and principles rooted in history, law, and justice - and value, and uplift them; not the brawlers.

[sheshe2]

58. I really love your posts, W_Hamilton.

I just wanted you to know that.

[betsuni]

64. Oh, I am member of that fan club too!

[sheshe2]

65. 😊

[MorbidButterflyTat]

84. Don't forget me!

[Nixie]

89. Same here, she! Love W_HAMILTON.

Always nails it.

🥰🙌🤩

[betsuni]

62. I'm tired of thinking: It's politics. This is stupid. Phony revolutionaries make everything a holy moral purity test

that Democrats can't possibly pass because it's politics ("voting my conscience" ) -- two politicians can vote the same 93% of the time and one is an evil corrupt establishment elite while the other is an Authentic Grassroots True Progressive fighting for The Will of The People. Are they five years old?

[Arazi]

17. It's the combination of refusing to endorse the Dem candidate, Mamdani

And the effusive praise for Adams that sticks in one’s craw.

Nobody’s fooled here

[questionseverything]

28. He won't even say his name, wtf

[QueerDuck]

42. Save your anger for the GOP. This is such an insignificant thing for anyone to obsess about.

"Nobody's fooled" ?? I'm sorry, that's ambiguous and unclear. What does that mean? Who is being accused of being deceptive? Moi? Jeffries? Democrats?

Please explain, thanks.

[iemanja]

71. Adams is a criminal

Any other criminals he should be praising?

[QueerDuck]

73. LOL 😂 He wasn't praising any crimes.

[iemanja]

74. He was praising the criminal

who collaborates with Trump, while Jefferies won't endorse the Democratic nominee.

[QueerDuck]

75. So? It makes no difference.

The election is decided and an insincere or coerced endorsement will have zero effect. Move on. Attack the GOP instead.

[iemanja]

76. It makes a great deal of difference to Democrats

and it emboldens MAGAts.

[QueerDuck]

79. The only thing that "emboldens" the GOP...

... is when Democrats attack Democrats for petty and insignificant things like this. Let it go.

Attack the GOP instead. Capicse?

[MorbidButterflyTat]

86. Exactly

Dems dividing Dems is great for MAGAt Republicans.

[angrychair]

92. No, it is a big deal

He praised a criminal who ran his office like a criminal.

How can Democrats expect to be taken seriously about the criminal behavior of this administration when a leader of our Party is literally praising the job and actions of an actual criminal that went so far as to create a conspiracy with Mango Mussolini to bury the case against him.

Sorry, it's a very big deal. Especially given that Jefferies has been openly critical of Mamdani on more than one occasion.

[Nixie]

109. Exactly. The GOP loves "our" hapless purity tests that are just

useless superiority snits that turn off voters. In the meantime, the GOP runs actual convicted felons and rapists and hold all the power. How long does it take for them to figure this out.

Attack some Republicans for a change.

[Scrivener7]

104. LOL! Well THAT'S an interesting parse!

By that logic, it's fine to praise trump as long as you don't praise rape and rank corruption and constant lies.

Interesting take!

[QueerDuck]

106. Pretzel logic. Not mine.

Interesting indeed. LOL!

[Scrivener7]

107. Well then why did you say it? I'm talking about YOUR statement

that it's ok to praise the criminal if you don't praise the crime.

That's a pretty craven take.

[newdeal2]

2. Eric Adams was great for comedy

His PSA about checking your kid’s bedroom for drugs and weapons was an all time great skit worthy of SNL.

[Passages]

3. lol

[Ferrets are Cool]

4. We had a saying when I was young....mealy mouthed.

This describes this "statement".

[Renew Deal]

6. A primary opponent for Jeffries should "weigh in" before early voting.

[bigtree]

7. giving him (and his supporters, many of whom are Democrats) props for withdrawing

..you're not just leaning against Jeffries here, but against a lot of Democrats in New York who are fighting to hold into that seat.

But, this is more important, I guess; like the efforts of some political geniuses who think it advantages the party to divide and wedge Democrats against our own leader in the House.

[themaguffin]

8. No, I'm not.

[bigtree]

9. ugh

It's NY politics, and the republican party has worked overtime to divide Democrats there. Unity among ALL Democratic supporters will be essential to holding that seat.

Forest, trees.

[mr715]

10. I look forward to Rep. Jeffries

Full throated endorsement of the Democrat, Zohran Mamdani.

[bigtree]

19. do you, now?

...does the Democratic leader in the House always endorse candidates for mayor?

I'd guess it should be easier for Democratic leaders now that the field is narrowing. I'm not surprised they've held off outright endorsing one of the several prominent Dems announced for the seat.

[questionseverything]

29. So the voters and the primary mean nothing?

Time to back the people’s choice

[bigtree]

32. there are Dem supporters behind each of the Dem candidates

...which group of voters are you willing to alienate from the election at this stage, if you're the Democratic leader who just happens to be from NY?

[questionseverything]

33. Anyone who doesn't support the voter's choice in the democratic primary

Is not a democratic “ leader “

[bigtree]

37. I'd guess that now that Adams has withdrawn, it's going to be an easier endorsement

...but that race was complicated by two major Democrats (with Democratic supporters) running as independents.

[mr715]

48. Only one of them won the primary.

As far as I see, there is only 1 democrat in the race.

[bigtree]

50. but there are more than one candidate's supporters that we need to get to the polls on election day

...despite some people either trying to divide them or not giving heed to the politics of assuaging Adams voters.

This isn't the zero sum effort that you present here.

[mr715]

51. I'm pretty sure Mamdani

is going to win on his own merits and not by cobbling together defectors from Eric Adams or Sliwa.

Majorities are zero sum, and I think Mamdani has one.

[mr715]

53. And bigtree please know

I respect and appreciate your insight and perspective. I happen to disagree with you and hope I am not sounding like a dick.

[bigtree]

56. I fucking love political debates

...and I'm very pleased to hear your skin isn't ruffled either by this discussion.

(go, Mamdani!)

Never believe that a few caring people can't change the world. For, indeed, that's all who ever have.
- Margaret Mead

[mr715]

57. So good to have a party that is diverse but shares love for debate (nt)

[Tom Rinaldo]

60. OK, I'll belabor the obvious here

"several prominent Dems announced for the seat." They had a campaign and then one of them, Mamdani, easily won the Democratic primary and became the official Democratic Party candidate for NYC Mayor. True, the Democratic candidate for Mayor now has opposition in the General Election from some running on other party lines. There's nothing unusual about that, happens all the time.

While Democratic Party congressional leaders don't routinely issue official endorsements for each local election in the country, Usually no one specifically asks any of them about the hundreds of local races. NYC is the biggest local election our nation has. Jeffries lives in NYC and, yes, people have asked. It is national news worthy that the Democratic leader in the House has still not endorsed the Democratic candidate running to be Mayor of his home city.

[bigtree]

63. I'd give the endorsement more than this minute

...the race had two independent candidates who carried support from local Democratic voters.

Whatever some may think of Adams, he was some voters' horse in the race, and he JUST withdrew. I don't believe the Dem leader in the House hesitating to insert himself in a race right now that isn't about him is something unusual.

I also don't believe that everyone demanding he endorse has the interests of the party at the fore of their concern.

Besides, isn't Jeffries going to eventually endorse? Sounds like it.

“I expect to have more to say about the mayor’s race shortly. The governor has endorsed, the speaker of the assembly made an endorsement, and over the weekend, Congresswoman Yvette Clark in the neighboring congressional district, who’s a good friend of mine, made that decision.” Jefferies said.
https://thehill.com/homenews/5516289-jeffries-decision-mamdani-endorsement/

...let me ask you this.

Do you think this, from my state's Senator, is a worthwhile or productive exchange of views?

A spokesperson for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) referred to Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D) as “Chris Van Who?” after the Maryland senator criticized New York Democrats for not endorsing Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani in New York City’s mayoral race.

“Leader Hakeem Jeffries will have more to say about the general election well in advance of Nov. 4,” Jeffries spokesperson Justin Chermol told The New York Times in response to Van Hollen’s remarks.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5503579-van-hollen-criticizes-nyc-democrats/

...so many non-New Yorkers who want to present this as a fight within the party. I can't see anything more unproductive and threatening to Democratic party interests in that state or anywhere else than this public rhetoric from people outside of the Mamdani campaign, second only to actual republican meddling in the race.

[themaguffin]

16. yeah, I'm not "dIvIdInG." I simply posted about the statement. Drop the disingenuous bullshit.

Last edited Mon Sep 29, 2025, 06:12 PM - Edit history (3)

[Renew Deal]

11. Don't want to offend the 7% that support a Trump loving crook

[W_HAMILTON]

15. Democratic voters don't know how to "politics."

[QueerDuck]

47. So true. IMHO, things like vanity and purity and virtue signaling are luxuries that we cannot afford.

[edhopper]

97. His withdrawal helps Cuomo, not Mondami

You should know this. But then again, you sound like you are backing Cuomo for Mayor even if you won't come out and say it.

[muriel_volestrangler]

98. He was running against the Democratic candidate

He did not suggest his supporters vote Democratic now that he's withdrawn. He just claimed he was innocent of all the accusations against him, and said he'd been stopped from using election funding.

*If* he'd made any attempt at any stage in this election to be part of the Democratic party, or to support it in any way whatsoever, I might see you'd have a little sympathy or respect for him. But he didn't. So why on earth would you "give him props" for doing exactly what Trump wants?

NEW YORK — The major players behind an ill-fated deal to make Mayor Eric Adams the Trump administration’s ambassador to Saudi Arabia have financial ties to a developer trying to win approval for a New York City casino.

Billionaire developer Steve Witkoff, who serves as President Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, is a consultant for the bidder, the Bally’s Corporation, according to his financial disclosures. Witkoff floated the Saudi diplomatic post to Adams’ team earlier this month. Frank Carone — a close Adams adviser, his reelection campaign chair and former City Hall chief of staff — also took part in discussions about the role.
...
Trump has inserted himself into the election drama as well, publicly insisting that mayoral candidates opposed to Mamdani consolidate the field. To that end, the Trump administration and Adams’ team were working to award the mayor the ambassadorship or another administration post to get him out of the race, but he’s so far refused to step aside.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/26/adams-allies-push-trump-ambassadorship-and-a-new-york-city-casino-bid-tied-to-his-veto-00582830

[bigtree]

124. you know I didn't 'give him props for doing what trump wanted'

...I'll just leave it there, because that's just wack.

Make your points without the personalizations. Jeffries giving props for him withdrawing is standard when you're trying to keep a splintered coalition together.

People need to take into account how convoluted NY politics is and take more responsibility, as Jeffries does here, for bringing Democrats together in that race so they show up on election day.

You're still fighting this as if Adams was still running. We've moved beyond that today. Keep up.

[muriel_volestrangler]

126. Your post reads like you are giving Adams props

" giving him (and his supporters, many of whom are Democrats) props for withdrawing"

and we know Trump wanted him to withdraw. So, no, I don't "know I didn't 'give him props for doing what trump wanted'". Are you saying that we should have read into your post title "Jeffries was giving him ..."?

[bigtree]

127. your own projections

...your own bias which doesn't comport with what's actually happening here.

[muriel_volestrangler]

128. OK, so you won't say that it was Jeffries "giving props" that you were writing about

so I'll stick with my original reading that you were giving the props.

I have no idea whatsoever what "projections" or "bias" you think is operating here. You're just throwing in buzzwords to try and make it look like you've got a point.

[bigtree]

130. what's the point in misrepresenting me, even after I made myself clear?

...what do you think is being accomplished by this tearing at good people who are working to support the party?

Bashing me and Jeffries? What are you accomplishing here? Both the Dem leader and I are still working and advocating for the advancement of Democrats and our Democratic agenda. Neither of us is campaigning for Adams, never have never will.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries declines to back NYC Mayor Eric Adams in Democratic primary

“I’m going to work as hard as i can to make sure that the next mayor of the city of New York is a Democrat,” the powerful Brooklyn Democrat added.

Jeffries’ non-endorsement stance is a shift from his position in 2021 when he backed Maya Wiley in the Democratic primary. She finished third in the ranked-choice contest behind Adams, who edged out Kathryn Garcia to win the party’s nod.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/rep-hakeem-jeffries-declines-back-174400468.html

Adams isn't running anymore, and if you break out of the projections and bother to read the thread, you might just find how I really feel about Adams. But I'm not invested in the tear down session, as some folk seem to believe that continuing to run against Adams is the game here, and others are thinking tearing down DUers is just as important as retaining that seat.

What's up with that?

[muriel_volestrangler]

131. Again, you're not denying that you were "giving props" to Adams. You have not been clear about that.

So I don't think I'm "misprepresenting" you. I gave you the chance to be clear, and you still haven't taken it.

Yes, we should run against the corrupt Adams. That's how you win the seat. Not praising him, as Jeffries does, while ignoring the corruption.

[bigtree]

132. your words, not mine

...again, what's this accomplishing, misrepresenting me like this?

Maybe stop.

Stop.

[muriel_volestrangler]

133. No, they are your words. In your post title.

I'm not misrepresenting you. You could clarify that you meant that Jeffries was the one "giving props", but you have never done so. It would be easy for you to do it. But you refuse to.

[bigtree]

134. okay

...you can do this without me.

I have endless energy for political debate, but you appear to have made this about me, and that's really unfortunate.

Again, you'll have reply to me without my participation from now on. I personally regret that, but I don't have much energy or capacity to argue with people about myself as others may possess, and I won't subject myself willingly to any of that.

[no_hypocrisy]

12. Now please endorse Mamdani.

[QueerDuck]

49. This sounds more like a control-issue than anything that would serve any practical purpose or value.

I think it's pretty clear that he's got this election in the bag. What difference would it make for anyone to compel such an endorsement? The smart money says it's time to move on. This horse is dead.

[mr715]

59. What do you mean by "control issue"

Who, what, and why?

[QueerDuck]

69. IYKYK ... if not... sorry.

I'm not in the habit of spoon feeding and explaining the obvious meaning of my comments for entertainment purposes. Again, sorry.

Love ya, mean it. 🥰🍷🫂🤗

[mr715]

70. No, I really don't

Who is enforcing control? I don't see it as entirely obvious

I'm not being rhetorical, I'd like a little clarification if you do not mind.

[QueerDuck]

82. I cannot help you.

[betsuni]

95. Endorsements used to identify and label enemies. How Planned Parenthood ended up on the Establishment enemies

list about ten years ago. Us vs Them populists need lots and lots and lots of THEM corrupt enemies.

[Scrivener7]

78. It's actually too late for that. His gyrations to avoid endorsing him till now tell the whole story.

[betsuni]

14. Popular for Halloween this year: The Jeffries & Schumer Two-headed Establishment Monster costume.

In the Democratic Leadership Bashing section at the Halloween store.

Trick or Trump.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

87. Runner Up:

The faceless nameless Primary Boogeyman! (Boogeyperson?)

The spooky hovering threat used by the displeased puritans and/or control freaks.

[Ping Tung]

18. Politics as usual.

Getting into politics is like stepping into dog shit. Che Guevara

[Mysterian]

20. Jeffries is heaping praise upon a corrupt piece of garbage

I wonder why the Democratic party is polling so poorly?????

[bigtree]

22. what Dem leader in NY didn't praise Adams for withdrawing?

Hochul, Jeffries and others praise Mayor Adams as he drops re-election campaign

Gov. Hochul, longtime pal the Rev. Al Sharpton and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries were among the political figures who praised Mayor Adams’ mayoral tenure as he announced Sunday he would be ending his reelection campaign.
https://www.nydailynews.com/2025/09/28/eric-adams-drop-out-mayor-race-reaction/

[Mysterian]

24. Ocasio-Cortez and Mamdani for starters

I'm sure there are more.

[bigtree]

25. she supports her fellow Queens ally

...that's different from an actual Dem leader, like the governor, for instance, weighing in on behalf of one candidate ostensibly against the others.

Do you agree with anything the mayor signed into law or enacted by EO?


Mayor Adams Signs Legislation to Build Critically-Needed Housing
https://www.nyc.gov/mayors-office/news/2024/12/mayor-adams-signs-legislation-build-critically-needed-housing-address-sewer-flood

[Mysterian]

26. Yeah, it's OK to be corrupt if you did some good things

I wonder why the Democratic party is polling so poorly?????

[bigtree]

30. do you support the legislation, or not?

...because that's what Jeffries was praising here, not corruption.

[Mysterian]

34. Are you claiming Jeffries is merely praising the housing legislation, not Adams?

That's funny.

[bigtree]

38. read the statement

...or, better yet, do better to understand it if you're going to make broad assumptions behind the political rhetoric.

Your concerns don't seem to account for NYC politics.

Jeffries and other Dem leaders aren't inexperienced in running and winning against republicans there, so I'll take their political chops into account without casting aspersions on political statements they make, certainly not suggesting they support corruption or any of the other invective people use to characterize Democrats.

[Mysterian]

40. Well, it sounds like a bunch of baloney to me

Adams is a fucking crook who sidled up to none other than Donald Fucking Trump so why does Jeffries make him sound like a great American hero. I'm sick of the bullshit and I'm guessing the people of New York are too.

[bigtree]

43. did he say he was a 'great American hero'

...I read praise for his past public service, which I'm certain his political opponents would like to denigrate, as well as the legislation he supported and helped enact.

I get that you don't seem to be able to see past the media reported criminal accusations, but there are many other things that concern Dems in this election; like getting voters to the polls.

How do you keep that seemingly disparate number of potential Dem voters together and get them to the polls?

That concern will require more than just anger against Adams, or just focusing on the winner in that primary.

[Mysterian]

45. Yeah, I'm sure the same ol' same ol' is just the ticket to success

Let's just keep on pretending scumbags like Adams are treasures of the Democratic party and people will show up to the polls in droves.

[questionseverything]

35. He was charged with 4 felonies by the Biden justice department

[bigtree]

39. I'm looking, but I can't find where he was found guilty.

...you know, the part where they prove the charges, including what was reported in the news, in a court of law with evidence and witnesses?

[mr715]

54. Well he was pretty darn guilty

Trump stopped the prosecution in exchange for concessions in re: ICE, if I recall.

[bigtree]

61. he appears to have accepted favors from the Turkish fellow(s)

...and the quid pro quo looks to be some influence he allowed the person in a community center project?

I'd look closer at what the Supreme Court just said about bribery of public officials as they loosened the law, but I'd agree that his actions were politically questionable.

Calling him a crook and all I think is a bit much. He's a pol compromised by the money and favors he's reportedly taken, but he's not charged right now or convicted of anything, and that's the bottom line on that.

I'd also say that his past service that Jeffries praised here doesn't really look to be in question.

Adams was an officer in the New York City Transit Police and then the New York City Police Department (NYPD) for more than 20 years, retiring at the rank of captain. He served in the New York State Senate from 2006 to 2013, representing the 20th district in Brooklyn. In 2013, Adams became the first black American to be elected Brooklyn Borough President; he was re-elected in 2017.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Adams

He apparently joined the force after he and his family members had experienced abuses at the hands of police in their youth.

And, Adams is no stranger to political prosecutions.

Wiki:

In 2006, Adams was put under surveillance and investigated by the NYPD for appearing on television in his official capacity as a police officer and critiquing Mayor Michael Bloomberg.[25] Internal Affairs Bureau of the NYPD opened an investigation into this and charged Adams with disseminating misinformation, divulging official police business, and speaking as a representative of the department without permission. He retired from the police force with the rank of captain shortly after being found guilty for speaking in an official capacity.

Outside of that, he's been a political opportunist and practices self-benefiting politics for what mainly looks like self-promotion.

Not a fan.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

88. If you think that's bad

Wait til you hear what the MAGAt Republicans have been doing!!!!

[betsuni]

96. Ha!

[bigtree]

31. those aren't Democratic leaders

...your take needs more actual political knowledge.

[Mysterian]

36. Still grasping, I see.

So, Democratic congresswomen are not leaders? Nor is the Democratic nominee for the mayor of New York City? What kind of political knowledge does it take to make that kind of stupid conclusion?

[bigtree]

41. not in the context of what I was obviously referring to

...and the different roles that Democratic leaders play in elections of other Democrats around the country, and the different ambitions and circumstances in each race.

On this one there have been several candidates, each with Democratic supporters who we hope will show up to vote on election day.

I'm not convinced your approach is superior to the Dem leaders'. That simple.

[Mysterian]

44. Blah, blah, blah

You said it. Own it.

[bigtree]

46. cool

[Torchlight]

23. From my chair, little more than a non-issue

followed most closely by for-profit division manufacturers.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

90. Gee

I wonder who that could be??

[BeyondGeography]

27. Authentically?

LMAO. Nobody could ever even tell you where he lived.

[mr715]

55. Under the GWB

But on the Jersey side.

Edit: (Trolling) haha. Under the bridge. Sorry.

[BeyondGeography]

66. Come to think of it

What’s more authentically New York than playing games with your primary residence for tax purposes?

[mr715]

68. Midnight Pad Thai nt

[cilla4progress]

52. so Jeffries is compromised, too?

disgusting

[QueerDuck]

80. No.

🙄

[BlueTsunami2018]

67. Praises utterly corrupt piece of shit, won't endorse Democratic candidate.

So typical.

I’m really getting to the end of the line with these guys.

[iemanja]

72. Same

And they wonder why Democrats have the lowest approval ratings in recent history.

[QueerDuck]

81. Focus your anger on the GOP.

Making a mountain from a molehill is a waste of time.

[BlueTsunami2018]

83. I'm mad at all of them.

The Republicans for being fascists, the Democrats for not being a true opposition party, the courts for being corrupt, the media for normalizing all this bullshit…..

There’s plenty of scorn to go around.

[QueerDuck]

85. And how will it help to defeat the GOP when some folks go to such great lengths to demonize the Democrats and

to nitpick, hyper-parse, and over-analyze every syllable in the greatest of efforts to find some reason, real or invented (mostly invented) to be outraged and drive others away from the party. This smacks of promoting the BS lie that "both parties are the same"... and then those who do so stand back and admire their handywork and bemoan the fact that "nobody voted for the Democrat" while forgetting all that they did to suppress the vote and divide the party. Save your scorn for the GOP. Nobody gets everything they want in politics.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

91. You make sense

[BlueTsunami2018]

93. You know why people think that?

Because both parties are capitalist parties beholden to mega donors. Obviously, Democrats will throw some bones and scraps to the working class which makes them better than the outright cruel fascists. And of course they’re herds better on social issues. But the ruling class is always the top priority. Let’s not kid ourselves here. It’s why the massive, bloated unnecessary defense budget gets passed without a problem every time it comes up. It’s why we couldn’t even get a public option in the ACA despite having 60 votes in the Senate, let alone universal healthcare. Whether it’s Lieberman or Nelson from back then, assholes Manchin and Sinema recently or Fetterman now, there's always going to be some “concerned” sellout who refuses to do what needs to be done and lets everyone off the hook. “Hey, we tried. Oh well.” Just as the Republicans take turns being the one “maverick” who goes against the party line while knowing whatever horrible thing they’re ostensibly standing against is going to pass, there always that one Democrat who bucks the party line and makes good things fail.

I’ve voted Democratic my whole life, I’ll vote for whomever they put up but I’m allowed to be mad at them for not embracing candidates with popular ideas or adopting those ideas or worse, running away from those ideas and shitting on the person offering them. For not seeing the writing on the wall that we’ve all seen as laypeople for decades. For selling out to corporate interests instead of truly working for the People.

They have an embarrassing approval rating against a party that are open fascists. We need to address that and they seem clueless on how to do it or too scared to because of the dreaded “S” word, which they’re going to call us anyway. Fucking right I’m mad at them. But I don’t hate them. I fucking hate the fascists.

It’s all so frustrating and infuriating.

[Emile]

102. +1 Great Post

Last edited Tue Sep 30, 2025, 07:21 AM - Edit history (1)

[muriel_volestrangler]

113. Here's how it will help. Jeffries sees enough Democrats telling him "get with the fucking program

and support the Democratic candidate in public", and then he will support the Democratic candidate in public. And that way, centrist Democrats in NYC will say "hey, if Jeffries is OK with Mamdani, maybe I should be too", and then they'll vote for him.

See? Party cohesion is the goal here. It's nothing at all like "both parties are the same" - it is "every Democrat should support the Democratic candidate, who is nothing like the Republicans". Everyone here does have scorn for the Republicans. The problem is that Adams does not, and Jeffries is wasting his time by praising Adams, when he could be supporting a Democrat instead.

[QueerDuck]

115. Nonsense. He already has this election wrapped up. These demands being made of Jeffries are just bullying, nothing more.

What he says or doesn't say will have no real world impact on the outcome of the election. Adams is history, as long as folks will allow him to be. Obsessing about him serves no good purpose. He's just being used as a prop and an exaggerated, overblown and manipulated excuse to attack Jeffries. "Oh boo hoo, Jeffries isn't reading the script we wrote for him. He won't let us put words in his mouth. He's not worthy. Let's punish him!" Honestly we can't afford the luxury of attacking our own. Best to attack the GOP instead.

Move on. Let it go... let it go. 🎶🧊

[muriel_volestrangler]

118. What we want is Jeffries supporting Democrats, not Adams - Jeffries could have just said nothing about him

It's Jeffries' public statement that has got us talking about who Jeffries supports. It's Jeffries' fault.

[QueerDuck]

121. LOL! He doesn't "support" Adams... he was being polite. He's certainly not going to read from the fantasy script

that many here think he ought to perform... the one that's laced with insults and profanities and rude comments about his momma. Jeffries does not need to lower himself to such performances. He's not some minstrel show dancer meant to entertain everyone who hates Adams. He has risen to the occasion and maintained the dignity and decorum that his office and his position demands. Leave the shouting and insults to the youtube pundits, please. Jeffries is NOT going to perform for anyone... not even the purity driven folks who want to bully him into submission. It's just not going to happen. Give up. Move on. Let it go, let it go. 🧊🎶

[QueerDuck]

100. Then this display of anger is a luxury we cannot afford. Tearing down Democrats does not help us to regain the majority.

That's all I'm trying to say. I'm sure it feels good for you to rage at Democrats and therefore discourage others from supporting us, but that benefits only one person and fails to consider the bigger picture and more far reaching consequences. But, you do you... rage away. I'll be working to support Democrats and highlight everything that's good about our party rather than seeking-out and focusing (obsessing) on the negatives.

[Scrivener7]

103. Sorry, but insisting we all say nothing but "Yay, Democrats" isn't going to get us where we need to be. Our leadership

is not rising to the moment, and there is nothing wrong with pointing that out and stating the obvious: we need leadership that will rise to the moment.

My guess is that those you are chastising are out there doing the work, supporting the values Democrats stand for. There is nothing wrong with asking our leadership to do the same.

[QueerDuck]

105. Every time this maple-syrup sweetness and purity test has been demanded, it's failed.

The purity tests that try to make Democrats look bad have never helped us in the past, in fact they do more harm than good. This is in addition to those who inexplicably demand that Democrats use powers that they do not possess (as if we were the majority party) and then blame Democratic leadership for willfully not doing the things that they cannot do (as a minority party.) Oddly, the fact that these things do NOT help Democrats leads some to believe that the repeated failure is "proof" that the Democrats need to be even more pure than originally demanded. Yet, that doesn't help either. It's a vicious cycle that needs to stop.

My "guess" differs 180 degrees from yours.

[Scrivener7]

108. Sorry, but the purity test these days is coming from

those who insist the Democratic leadership is doing just fine and no one can be allowed to suggest different.

They're very obviously not, and there's nothing wrong with acklowledging that, no matter how loudly a small posse here insists, "This is fine, nothing to see here," as we stumble our way into fascism.

In this particular situation, EVERY Democrat should be full-throatedly supporting the Democratic candidate, and not those opposing him. And there's no reason whatsoever for our leadership to be fluffing a criminal from the opposition.

[muriel_volestrangler]

111. Fuck calling this a "purity test". That's a load of bullshit.

This is not asking anyone to be "pure" - to hold an exact set of policies. It's asking them to do job number one of a "party" - to support the others in the party. If leaders in the party - especially leaders whose districts are in New York City - are spending their time praising a corrupt mayor who is now closer to the appalling Trump regime than to the Democratic party, rather than helping the Democratic mayoral candidate, then they're failing as Democratic leaders.

Their lack of support of Mamdani, the official Democratic candidate, is what is "divisive". Calling criticism of Jeffries a "purity test" is gaslighting.

[Emile]

112. Exactly. If it is a test, it's a leadership test, and he failed.

[QueerDuck]

114. It's performative. Folks want Jeffries to perform on demand and write his script for him.

None of this matters. What he says or doesn't say will not matter a whit. The NYC mayor's race is decided, he doesn't need help. People are just angry at Jeffries because he won't be their little dancing puppet on a string. This has nothing to do with "failing as Democratic leaders". Please. It's absolutely a purity test and this type of behavior extends well beyond Jeffries. This type of bullying aimed at Jeffries is 100% purity-driven... it's just another example of "do as I tell you to do, and prove your worthiness, or else!" and it's absolutely ridiculous. A waste of time. Get over it and move on. Focus the hatred and contempt on the GOP instead. Claiming it's not purity driven is gaslighting.

[muriel_volestrangler]

117. If it doesn't matter, then stop posting to tell DUers how awful they are

You're obsessed with it. But then you turn around and say "it doesn't matter". You are demanding that DUers do as you want.

It's fucking ridiculous to call DUers criticising the House Minority Leader "bullying". He's the one with a position of power.

[QueerDuck]

119. What matters is the continual and nonstop attacks and smears of Democrats. This is just one of many and it all adds up.

The purist individuals who never miss any opportunity to nitpick and hyper-parse are experts in grievance shopping. When they look long enough and hard enough, they'll always find something (real or imagined) to be unhappy about and will blow it all out of proportion and obsess about it for weeks... to the exclusion of everything else that's good about our party. Yes... it's absolutely bullying.

In the grand scheme, what Jeffries says or doesn't say with regard to this matter is irrelevant. It won't make a bit of difference (except for the purity seekers) to what unfolds in NYC. But the obsessive attacks and smears on him (and others) are part of a much larger problem that will hurt us in the long run.

[muriel_volestrangler]

120. You pretend to not know what the meaning of "bullying" is

and ignore what "party" means. When you say "hurt us", who is the "us" you mean?

[QueerDuck]

123. Insulting me won't help anything, but it does reveal much.

I'm not going to play these types of word games. Either ya get it, or ya don't. And, honestly, I think you're much smarter than you're pretending to be right now. When someone starts to make pedantic demands that I explain my plain spoken (written) comments and that I must define for them the obvious meaning of everyday words... well... that type of deflection and distraction technique is, to me, a big clue that the person making the demands knows that they have lost the argument or that they are arguing from a position of weakness, particularly when the term that is obvious to all other reasonable parties, and in the context of all that came before leaves no room for the type of pretend ambiguities that are being imagined.

Let it go. Let it go. 🎶

[muriel_volestrangler]

125. You *are* playing word games

You misuse "bullying". You pretend that criticising a party leader for not backing a party candidate is a "purity test".

You started by talking about when someone dies, or retires. Adams has done neither; he's stopped opposing a Democratic candidate. That shouldn't be an occasion for praise of his past; if there's a reaction from a Democrat, it should be "good riddance".

You say insulting things like "I'm not in the habit of spoon feeding and explaining the obvious meaning of my comments for entertainment purposes".

[QueerDuck]

129. For anyone to demand (or expect) Jeffries to publicly proclaim "good riddance" is absurd.

That's up to you and the hard-core pundits, youtubers, writers and editorialists. Jeffries is dignified and has too much respect for the office he holds to stoop to such performative insults for the pleasure of those who deem him to not be pure enough as if he is obligated to prove his "street-creds" to them.

Dies, retires or leaves office... please, spare me the semantic pedantry. Again, in this context, it's clear what's meant and such word games (as before) reveals the weakness of the arguments. My refusing to over-explain things that (to reasonable people) should need no explaining (ie: spoon-feeding) is not the insult you imagine it to be.

Let it go, let it gooooo! 🎶

[Scrivener7]

77. I just can't with this man.

What a mess. We're mismanaging the shutdown, squandering a perfect messaging opportunity, he hasn't endorsed Mamdani, and now this.

He needs to be primaried.

[helpisontheway]

94. I miss Speaker/Minority Leader Pelosi! Nt

[Emile]

99. We need new leadership.

[Bread and Circuses]

101. Why make a statement? Now?

Jeffries is hard to comprehend. This is not the first time that he issues a statement out if the blue,

Why doesn’t he endorse the Dem nominee for mayor of NYC ?!?

I’d rather have AOC as the Dem Leader in the House.

[dlk]

110. Tempest in a teapot

Seriously, with all our country is currently facing, Jeffries comments don’t merit this degree backlash. Let’s focus on something substantive.

[SamKnause]

116. Silence would have been a better choice.

Apparently I don't know how the political game is played.

Hell, I don't even know the rules.

[David__77]

122. Wow what strong and unmitigated praise for Adams.

Interesting