this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2025
212 points (99.1% liked)

politics

26422 readers
2602 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world
JuBe@lemmy.world
Lasherz12@lemmy.world
212
Pro-Israel Billionaire Who Led Mamdani Scaremongering Now Offers to Help NYC's Next Mayor | Common Dreams (www.commondreams.org)
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

One social media user wrote that the hedge fund executive Bill Ackman "went from acting like Mamdani was going to import ISIS to extending a friendly handshake… in like six hours."

. . . Hedge fund manager Bill Ackman poured over $1.75 million into the mayor's race with a laser focus on stopping Mamdani, whom he often ambushed with several-thousand-word screeds on his X account, which boasts nearly 2 million followers. He accused Mamdani—a staunch critic of Israel—of "amplifying hate" against Jewish New Yorkers, while suggesting that his followers (which happened to include many Jewish New Yorkers) were "terror supporters."

Meanwhile, the billionaire suggested that the democratic socialist Mamdani's "affordability" centered agenda, which includes increasing taxes on corporations and the city's wealthiest residents to fund universal childcare, free buses, and a rent freeze for stabilized units, would make the city "much more dangerous and economically unviable," in part by causing an exodus of billionaires like himself.

In turn, Mamdani often invoked Ackman's name on the campaign trail, using him as the poster boy for the cossetted New York elite that was almost uniformly arrayed against his candidacy. In one exchange, Mamdani joked that Ackman was "spending more money against me than I would even tax him."

After Mamdani's convincing victory Tuesday night, fueled in large part by his dominant performance among the city's working-class voters, Ackman surprisingly did not respond with "the longest tweet in the history of tweets" to lament the result as some predicted. Instead, he came to the mayor-elect hat in hand.

"Congrats on the win," he told Mamdani on X. "Now you have a big responsibility. If I can help NYC, just let me know what I can do."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Here's some anecdata: someone close to me became accidentally moderately rich (somwhere in the 50-100M range). Before that, he'd worked hard his whole life and endured hardship due to some of the usual problems that life throws at a working person. In the several years since the windfall, he has drifted from (by US standards) radical leftism to vaguely-leftish centrism. However, he does give away half the earnings on his wealth every year, and is very diligent in making sure that the groups he funds are efficient at delivering on their stated objectives. The programs he supports are soft-left and none of his money goes to anything remotely MAGA.

As for lifestyle: he moved to a bigger but discreetly anonymous house, replaced his ancient and rusting economy car with a more recent (but still second-hand) one, and he and his partner dine out more often than they previously did. No nouveau-riche glitz. If you saw him on the street, you'd assume he's a hippyish retired tradesman. So I'd characterize him as slightly warped by the sudden change in circumstance, but still self-aware.

Now, if a billion had landed in his lap, the warping power might have been proportionatey greater.

I like to think I'd be more resistant to the corrupting power of money, but like you, I don't know.