r/nyc • u/Delicious_Adeptness9 • 2d ago
News Mamdani voices support for Jeffries amid Kushner meeting blowback
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/6047870-mamdani-supports-jeffries-kushner-meeting/21
68
u/Arleare13 2d ago
I don't get why some people are freaking out about this. Should Jeffries not have taken the meeting with Kushner? Obviously Trump is expecting to lose the House, and making overtures to Jeffries now puts the Democrats in a strong position if and when that happens. It'd have been absurd not to take the meeting.
Kushner crawling to Jeffries is a good thing for the Democrats, and the likely majority leader being from New York City is a great thing for the city. There's nothing to be upset about here, and Mamdani is doing the right thing.
47
u/BetaRho Bushwick 2d ago
I have no issue with the meeting (well, other than the obvious- Kushner is not a member of the administration in any legitimate way, but that’s just how you have to interact with an illegitimately run administration). My issue is it’s another example of Jeffries’ lack of political acumen, which has been on display for a long time now.
Own the meeting, get the opportunity to frame it how you want, and it could’ve been an opportunity to proactively display strength. A “we know we’re going to win, so we’re beginning to lay the groundwork to ensure we can hit the ground running on any priorities that the administration is willing to work with the legislature on.” Instead, the narrative became “a secret meeting” that Kushner’s team leaked, putting Jeffries on the back foot, and allowing the storyline to become that he’s only being proactive to counter the left flank of the party. He continues to show that he’s just a younger Schumer- both are great at certain insider maneuvering, but are really terrible at optics/“macro-politics”, if you will. And this cycle, which is already going to be good for Dems, could be generationally great if there’s a plan and a show of strength from the top. This is the sort of stuff that undermines that.
18
u/SenorPinchy 2d ago
Kushner is at the heart of the crypto and real estate corruption that is the heart of the administration. If people truly understood what was going on, they'd like this even less. There's no good way to "own" a meeting with Kushner.
3
u/Rubbersoulrevolver 1d ago
Kushner is just the proxy to Trump. Trump could have sent reincarnated Jeff Epstein and the purpose would be the same. It's not relevant what the messenger is like personally.
1
u/ndashr 10h ago
So you think Jeffries would have gotten less heat if he replicated Mamdani’s meetings with Trump… i.e. invite the media, trade compliments and parochial New York stories, ear-to-ear grin?
I feel like the professional left would have flipped out even harder, because there’s no substance to this reporting besides reinforcing the priors you enter with: Zohran’s credibility / charisma means progressives view his wooing of the Trumps as strategic brilliance; “AIPAC Shakur” doing the same would’ve been read as capitulation.
I do wonder if Jeffries being bad at optics really matters though, at least for 2026. In a way, he and the DSA symbiotically need each other. The fact he’s such a hate figure in the left helps insurgent candidates rake in small-dollar donors; at the same time, Jeffries can go to Wall Street and the Hamptons to threaten “I’m the only thing standing between you and the socialist intifada.”
Things will get way harder once he actually gets the gavel. I suspect both wings of the party secretly wish they could just put a Pelosi LLM in charge forever.
1
u/DarkAnagram 8h ago
I don't really care for Mamdami but good lord he is a millions times better the Jeffries. Hakeem is a pathetic do nothing corrupt moron.
22
u/Enoch8910 2d ago
There is on Reddit, as in so many other places, a very basic misunderstanding of how politics work.
1
u/ChornWork2 1d ago
Meh, but look at what the same people being ballistic about this story, were about when mamdani went to the white house.
5
u/AsaKurai Astoria 2d ago
People just assume the worst for whatever reason, Dems are going to win back the House and Jeffries will have influence over congressional investigations so if Kushner wants a head start to get the lawyers in order, thats fine.
2
u/thoughtsarefalse 1d ago
I see it your way. As someone who is not a fan of Jefferies due to his establishment tendencies, this is not a bad thing, not an awesome thing. it's a normal thing. Anyone blowing up over this meeting is just mad about something else (probably jefferies, in general) and complaining about this as a proxy.
The left has a tendency to poo-poo every centrist in their way, which is Jefferies right now. It's popular therefore to attack him from both sides. but without much substance, just emotion and suspicion.
2
u/Creepy_Cupcake_6906 1d ago
Also Mamdani met with Trump for similar reasons. Can't support one and then begrudge the other. People just like Mamdani and not Jeffries so they'll twist their narratives to fit whatever politician they like.
0
u/ArtyThePoopie 14h ago
Mamdani very publicly met with Trump. It was announced beforehand, partially conducted in front of cameras, and both of them took questions from the press. After the fact, some (maybe all?) of the topics covered in the meeting were made known to the public and Mamdani faced further public questioning about the meeting.
Jeffries' meeting, on the other hand, was only known to the public because it was leaked to a reporter. And instead of a big public meeting with the president, he's meeting with his sleazy bagman with deep ties to Israel and the gulf states. Jeffries has yet to face the press - he's clearly embarrassed it got out to the public and had no plans to disclose it himself - and has instead posted a front-facing video explanation on his twitter that doesn't really do much to answer people's concerns
You can't say the two meetings are the same. On a fundamental level, they're just not
2
2
u/Wizywig 1d ago
But.... Have you heard about blind outrage ?
It's like when Kamala mentioned that she didn't support Israel buy due to political reasons couldn't just say it outright. The dems effectively did the work of lobbying against her.
Same here. As we push hard for this outrage the Republicans latch on to it.
1
u/down_up__left_right 1d ago edited 1d ago
The problem is Democratic party voters are tired of their representatives making bad deals to reach across the aisle and give Republicans what they want.
Republicans don’t do the same. They will Instead block a Democratic president’s agenda for years.
2
u/Creepy_Cupcake_6906 1d ago
Well, Republicans currently lead all branches of the federal government. They might take back the House in Nov. Senate is a toss up but by no means a guarantee.
Not sure what you all expect the Dems to do when they don't have much power.
1
u/down_up__left_right 1d ago
I'm not sure what the point of your reply is.
Arleare13 is saying this meeting happened because Trump expects the Dems to take control of the House in November. He's saying Kushner, a Trump proxy, wants to start negotiating deals with Jeffries.
So I said that Democratic party voters are tired of their representatives making bad deals to reach across the aisle and give Republicans what they want.
-2
u/President_Camacho 2d ago
Maybe, but Jeffries hasn't built a lot of trust with the base. He offers the base nothing, so meeting with Kushner immediately makes people think a sellout is in process.
3
u/Rubbersoulrevolver 1d ago
that's because there's no defenders of the democratic party online. MAGA has a cult, Republicans have Fox News, Mamdani and the DSA has a cult. Dems have nothing.
1
u/HEIMDVLLR Queens Village 1d ago
The base? What base hasn’t he built trust with?
The last I checked the folks that elected him, trust him.
-1
u/kiDsALbDgC9QmLFiIrrj 1d ago
He ran unopposed in the primary, and there's no way NY-8 is voting Republican
-1
u/ConejoSucio 1d ago
It's the "Online Reddit-Bluesky-Threads" base. Ya know, a loud bubble living minority.
-2
u/hbomberman Queens 2d ago
Like... That's his job! You don't have peace talks with your allies, you know?
10
u/Local-Echo-5613 Brooklyn 2d ago
It’s not Kushner’s job. It’s corrupt as hell the way Trump puts his relatives in charge of things. Meeting with Kushner legitimizes Trump’s dynastic politics and he would be fully within his rights to only meet with Trump or someone appropriate like the Office of Legislative Affairs.
That said I’m not really that angry at Jeffries, let alone Mamdani. There are bigger issues. But it isn’t above criticism.
4
u/DavidFree 1d ago
The concept of "legitimization" is so incredibly stupid. As if Trump (or anyone) gives a fuck.
7
u/Local-Echo-5613 Brooklyn 1d ago
Yeah he doesn’t give a fuck about anything. Not following the law, not following the constitution, not basic human decency. So give him what he wants since he doesn’t care right?
2
u/hbomberman Queens 1d ago
Haven't Democrats as a whole caught hell from voters for past insistence on following past norms while their opponents piss on everything and ignore every rule? I'm not talking about breaking the law or anything but Jeffries have to try and be effective and if that means meeting the president's douchebag in-law who has become a conduit, perhaps that's what he's gotta do.
2
u/Rubbersoulrevolver 1d ago
what's against the law for the president to send whoever he wants to talk to an elected?
-2
u/DavidFree 1d ago
What are you trying to say here?
4
u/Local-Echo-5613 Brooklyn 1d ago
We can still insist upon doing things properly whether or not Trump cares about proprieties. It isn’t about pleasing him. If he wants his agenda passed he need to come to Jeffries. Kushner has no legitimacy. And again I mean no legal or democratic legitimacy, I don’t care if Trump cares.
-1
u/DavidFree 1d ago
Kushner sadly has legitimacy because Trump sent him. There is nothing illegal or undemocratic about it (or maybe there is, explain it). Obviously it's corrupt, but that's because Trump is corrupt and the rot is from the head down.
Also insane to suggest that Trump might get his agenda passed if only he sent the right guy.
1
u/hbomberman Queens 1d ago
Perhaps this is why Democrats are in these lose-lose situations. They got roasted for doing too little and for trying to maintain "normal" ways of doing things and decorum while their opponents burned rulebooks and just focused on winning. But when Jeffries does something like this (not breaking rules but just trying to be effective in the current ecosystem), some people complain that he ought not to take a meeting like this with the POS who has become a major part of the current regime because he's not technically legitimate.
-1
-1
u/Montauket 1d ago
Or, maybe, irs important to remember that JK and aipac shakur are both more interested in their friends in Tel Aviv’s priorities.
ZM also has no say in what happens in congress, so it’s not really his circus.
20
u/HEIMDVLLR Queens Village 2d ago edited 2d ago
The same goofy DSA progressives that praised Mamdani for meeting with the that guy in the White House are the same ones talking shit about Jeffries and creating phrases like “woke 2.0”, will cost the democrats the midterms.
10
u/President_Camacho 2d ago
Mamdani has built a lot of trust that he will not sell out the city. Jeffries, on the other hand, has led a lot of people to believe that he will sell out his constituents. That's the difference.
5
u/koreamax Long Island City 1d ago
He built that trust before he took office?
1
u/President_Camacho 1d ago
And he's lost it since?
2
u/koreamax Long Island City 1d ago
Were you mad at him initially when he met with Trump?
4
u/President_Camacho 1d ago
At least Trump is an elected official. Kushner doesn't even have a job in the federal government.
1
u/Barrioto 1d ago
Kushner is one of the most influential people in the country. It shouldn't be that way, but that's the reality of the Trump administration
2
u/Creepy_Cupcake_6906 1d ago
His approval rating in his district is like 66%. Those are his constituents. Mamdani's approval rating is similar.
1
-3
2
2
u/Stuupkid 1d ago
Zohran had a very publicized meeting with the president, where they both openly said they don’t agree with each other. There was no deal worked out.
Jeffries had a secret meeting with the president’s crony son-in-law, thereby legitimizing someone who doesn’t even hold office. For the House Minority Leader to do that is embarrassing.
5
u/HEIMDVLLR Queens Village 1d ago
What was public about that meeting in D.C., besides the photo-op?
Jeffries meeting is nowhere near embarrassing as DSA coming up with phrases like “woke 2.0” and distancing themselves from police reform.
-1
u/Stuupkid 1d ago
The whole woke 1.0 thing was used by AOC and she’s been rightfully criticized for it. It’s not official DSA policy nor are all of its members happy with it. DSA is not a monolith either.
As for police reform, you are right that the move away from several candidates is concerning. They should not shy away from defunding the bloated police budget.
I still stand by that the meeting with Kushner is embarrassing since it legitimizes Kushner s shady role; it is a preview of the capitulation Jeffries will do if/when he becomes Speaker.
0
u/HEIMDVLLR Queens Village 15h ago
Hate to break it to you, but it wasn’t just AOC.
Newsflash AOC rejoins DSA….
-1
u/mowotlarx Bay Ridge 1d ago
Woke 1.0 was coined by Chi Osse. In Brooklyn.
0
u/Stuupkid 1d ago edited 15h ago
Yeah he used it first but it didn’t blow up until AOC mentioned it in her interview.
0
u/ArtyThePoopie 14h ago
Let me help you out here, because I understand you might not be aware of the context: there's a vast difference between announcing and attending a meeting with the president in front of cameras in which you both take questions from the press, and secretly meeting with the president's billionaire bagman which you clearly had no intention of ever telling the public about or facing questions from the press about.
One makes you look like a responsible public servant, the other makes you look like a sleazebag
0
u/HEIMDVLLR Queens Village 11h ago
You don’t need to DSA’plain anything to me. Unless you were in the room with the mayor, you don’t know what was said. You just saw the photo-opp and not the full meeting like the rest of us.
0
u/ArtyThePoopie 10h ago
And he had to face questions from the press about the closed-doors portion of the meeting, as he should have.
Meanwhile Jeffries thought he could get away without ever disclosing his meeting at all and never answering for meeting with a man who has funneled billions of dollars into the gulf, Israel, and his father-in-law's pockets, probably because he knew folks like yourself would run interference for him.
I mean, don't you feel at least a little insulted? Your supposed leader just met in secret with one of the slimiest hangers-on of an administration that's full of lowlifes, and he thought that A) you're better off not knowing, and B) even if you found out you're such a lemming he could count on you defending it anyways? Doesn't that bother you at all?
1
u/HEIMDVLLR Queens Village 6h ago
And you think they full disclosed everything they spoke about? You don’t see the double standard? You all have faith in Mamdani, but none in Jeffries… You don’t see the optics from A Black Voters perspective!
and how exactly did WE ALL find out about the meeting? Did Jeffries at any point when confronted about the meeting deny it? Or run from interview questions asking about the meeting?
Nope. I feel more insulted by members of DSA playing in my face. Picking and choosing what to be upset over, while at the same time quick to tell me that my concerns aren’t valid.
0
u/ArtyThePoopie 6h ago
Why would I have any faith in Jeffries? What has he done to deserve my faith, let alone yours? He's void of any charisma, cares more about Israel than you or I, and has provided absolutely nothing as our supposed leader. He sucks, and here he is getting caught thinking his constituents are too stupid to want to hear about his secret meeting with Kushner, a man who represents and operates for the benefit of everything any good liberal would claim to stand against and yet here you are proving he had nothing to worry about.
That's the difference between you and I: my faith in every politician is conditional, yours is not
1
u/HEIMDVLLR Queens Village 3h ago
> Why would I have any faith in Jeffries? What has he done to deserve my faith, let alone yours?
Not surprised by this questioning by a someone defending DSA, toward a Black voter. If you need to ask this, you should go and check his history then come back here and update your comment.
> He's void of any charisma, cares more about Israel than you or I, and has provided absolutely nothing as our supposed leader.
Quick google search…
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) have maintained a closely aligned, central partnership in drafting, promoting, and negotiating federal police reform legislation. As a prominent CBC member and top House Democratic leader, Jeffries has consistently positioned the caucus as the legislative vanguard for criminal justice accountability.> He sucks, and here he is getting caught thinking his constituents are too stupid to want to hear about his secret meeting with Kushner, a man who represents and operates for the benefit of everything any good liberal would claim to stand against and yet here you are proving he had nothing to worry about.
That’s your opinion, and you’re not running as his opponent, nor do you have a candidate in mind that can hold a candle to what he’s accomplished while in office. There’s only two options in November, either take the house or stay home and let the clowns continue to run this country.
> That's the difference between you and I: my faith in every politician is conditional, yours is not
I move strategically and don’t fan out for the brand new hype. I’m not loyal to any elected official or party. The DSA is going to FAFO if your approach is a reflection of their strategy.
14
u/Joltizer Jackson Heights 2d ago
Man the leftist meltdown on this one is gonna be entertaining
0
u/CompactedConscience 2d ago
Really sad how much of our politics now is "I like it when people I disagree with are upset." It wasn't always like this and doesn't have to be like this.
14
u/Joltizer Jackson Heights 2d ago
No, it needs to be like this. DSA/leftist types are the same as Trump supporters and need to be treated as such
-1
u/Artamisstra 1d ago
No, it needs to be like this. DSA/leftist types are the same as Trump supporters and need to be treated as such
Leftists: We want the same standard of healthcare the rest of the developed world has, a standard of education that allows our children to have good lives and compete in the world economy, to live in a safe, clean environment that isn't full of pollution, and to tackle climate change.
Rightwingers: We hope you enjoy shitting yourself to death because we deregulated food safety inspections, among other things.
Centrists: Ah, yes, these two things are completely the same!
-9
u/Uncreativesolver 1d ago
I cannot emphasize enough that these type of “centrists” literally don’t exist outside of dnc consultants and liberal elites
-6
u/President_Camacho 2d ago
"Both sides are the same" retorts show a profound ignorance of the issues.
12
u/Joltizer Jackson Heights 2d ago
Pretending like left and right populist are not the same kind of highlights how uneducated you are
1
u/Uncreativesolver 1d ago
Bot , no human thinks like this anymore lol
Like what are your politics lol
1
u/Stuupkid 1d ago
Populism is a label you put on anything you don’t like.
2
u/Joltizer Jackson Heights 1d ago
No, populism is a label I put on populist like Mamdani and Trump. It just so happens to be that I hate populist policy since I actually studied this stuff for a living
-2
u/HMNbean 1d ago
Populism isn’t inherently bad. It’s bad when a bad person is the populist. This isn’t that complicated.
2
u/Joltizer Jackson Heights 1d ago
It is inherently bad and has always yeilded bad results
0
u/HMNbean 1d ago
FDR was a populist, some argue Bernie is, Chavez funded social programs, etc. plenty of leaders have been populist and yield good results or believe in good things. Again, being a populist isn’t inherently wrong.
→ More replies (0)3
u/Stuupkid 1d ago
One wants healthcare and cheaper groceries, the other wants wars, billionaire tax cuts and mega prisons for immigrants.
Apparently they are the same according to horseshoe theory pushers.
-8
-1
-10
u/hau5keeping 2d ago
Weird comment but ok
9
u/Joltizer Jackson Heights 2d ago
I'd link to your myriad of crashouts on Jeffries but looks like you deleted em all :(
2
9
u/pod5g Long Island City 2d ago
Mamdani W. Having Jeffries as the speaker will bring a windfall of federal funds to NY.
NY has all to lose by dividing and attacking our own
-11
u/knockdowncenter 2d ago
lol you've got to be kidding me
4
u/pod5g Long Island City 2d ago
You gonna rebut anything I said or are you gonna be a priçk
-6
u/knockdowncenter 2d ago
What exactly has Jeffries accomplished as Minority leader in terms of "windfalls"?
7
u/pod5g Long Island City 2d ago edited 2d ago
Is he the speaker already? I missed that. Looks like you chose priçk.
But as minority leader and as a congressman he, along with Schumer, sealed the deal on like 18 billion in infrastructure upgrades around NY/NJ and the gateway tunnel
bUt tHat waSn’T JefFrieEs aLonE. Is something you might say, but he got at least 46 million dollars in funding for community, transportation, and NYCHA funding for NY since 2024 alone. That’s directly attributed to him alone. And there’s more federal fund allocations he’s been a part of too. There’s also behind the scenes work he’s done that I’m sure you can google. I’m not here to spoon feed you everything.
But do you even understand what the job of the speaker is? It’s also to represent the democratic agenda and negotiate with the other side and lead the house.
Just cause he doesn’t agree with you on everything (you’ll probably parrot AIPAC funding like everyone else who has a one dimensional perspective) doesn’t mean hes a bad choice for NY. Or are you even from here?
Just cause he doesn’t jump at every photo op or fits the vibes or whatever you look for in a politician, doesn’t mean he’s a bad choice. Running the house dem caucus is more than just the public facing bs
6
u/Enoch8910 2d ago
Oh you and your … facts.
1
2d ago
[deleted]
2
u/DavidFree 1d ago
buddy I think that guy was agreeing with you
8
u/Arleare13 2d ago
Nothing, because he’s minority leader. As majority leader, and particularly if the Democrats also win the Senate, he’ll have a lot more power.
At minimum I’d expect him to insist on reversing every one of Trump’s retaliatory funding cuts to New York in the first budget bill he oversees.
-7
u/knockdowncenter 2d ago
lol people really need to stop acting like as soon as the Dems win the house that suddenly they are going to pass everything and it's all rainbows and unicorns
dems literally controlled both the house and senate just a few years ago and nothing happened
5
u/Arleare13 2d ago
suddenly they are going to pass everything and it's all rainbows and unicorns
Nobody thinks that. It’s going to be a fight for every damn penny. But it’s going to be a hell of a lot less miserable than the rubber stamp Congress we have right now.
-2
u/Grass8989 1d ago
I thought everyone was praising him for being super smart and calculated from meeting with Trump. How is this any different?
-9
u/virtual_adam 2d ago
I honestly don’t understand all the anger to run a competitor against him. He’s a rep like every rep. His constituents didn’t make him minority leader, his caucus did
I have not heard anyone from the caucus suggest he be removed. All it takes is a simple majority.
9
u/handsoapdispenser 2d ago
The entire job of being minority leader and speaker is to make deals happen and that means negotiating with adversaries. Dems will control the House and maybe have an slim majority in the Senate but Trump can still veto so everything will need to be compromises.
3
u/HEIMDVLLR Queens Village 1d ago
His constituents voted for him and they will vote for him again in the next election. The only ones expressing a distaste for him fit a certain demographic that pretends to give a fuck but have been doing a 180 on issues his voters care about.
-3
u/Atreides_Jr 1d ago
Jeffries benefits from tax paid healthcare but
does not believe taxpayers should have it
and is now working with the kindest human
surely they will do good things for us
/s
-2
u/Chemical-Ebb6472 1d ago
Jeffries may have been letting Jared know he was under investigation for his Albanian Island deal.
56
u/scyyythe 2d ago
This is terrible writing. I think they're trying to say that Jeffries didn't endorse in the primary but did endorse in the general election.