Elizabeth WarrenFeaturedFox NewsNew YorkPoliticsSocietyVictor Davis HansonZohran Mamdani

What Mamdani Means for NYC: VDH’s Warning What Mamdani Means for NYC: VDH’s Warning

Victor Davis Hanson warned Americans to not be fooled by Zohran Mamdani’s charming smile.

Hanson joined Mark Levin on Fox News’ “Life, Liberty, & Levin” Saturday night and broke down three main factors contributing to the leading mayoral candidate for New York City’s popularity.

“I think he feels that he’s a creature of an off year, low turnout election in New York,” Hanson said. “Number two: The demography of New York has changed when people fled it after COVID. And then he’s going to run on this Obama-like charismatic smile.”

There’s “a million or a million and a half less conservative voters” after COVID, Hanson explained. And then with his charming front, Mamdani appears like “he is not going to be dangerous” because he “doesn’t scream and yell like Elizabeth Warren” does, for example.

“That fools a lot of people,” Hanson said. “He appeals to the upper, upper middle class who feel that their intellectual abilities or their degrees entitle them to a certain lifestyle, and they don’t have it in New York.”

Hanson added that he doesn’t think Mamdani’s supporters “expect what he’ll do.”

“We’re really talking about the upper, upper middle class in a low turnout election with a divided ticket with Andrew Cuomo and Curtis Sliwa, and he [Mamdani] thinks he can sneak in, and I think he’s right,” Hanson predicted. 

There could have been a united front against Mamdani, however, “with a center-right candidate,” Hanson said. Candidates like former New York City Mayors Mike Bloomberg, or better yet, like Rudy Giuliani, “would’ve won … but they didn’t have that.”

“He [Mamdani] smiles a lot, and he lies,” Hanson said. “He wants to disarm everybody in New York. He wants to outlaw guns, but he doesn’t want to disarm Hamas. It makes no sense, but it does make sense if he’s a radical Marxist, which he is.”

Mamdani is actually a very “privileged” person who “grew up with advantages” because his parents are a “multimillionaire professor [and a] filmmaker,” Hanson said.

“He seems to hate the very system that empowered his entire family,” Hanson said. “He’s a very dangerous person because he is charismatic.”



Source link

Related Posts

On April 12, 2021, a Knoxville police officer shot and killed an African American male student in a bathroom at Austin-East High School. The incident caused social unrest, and community members began demanding transparency about the shooting, including the release of the officer’s body camera video. On the evening of April 19, 2021, the Defendant and a group of protestors entered the Knoxville City-County Building during a Knox County Commission meeting. The Defendant activated the siren on a bullhorn and spoke through the bullhorn to demand release of the video. Uniformed police officers quickly escorted her and six other individuals out of the building and arrested them for disrupting the meeting. The court upheld defendants’ conviction for “disrupting a lawful meeting,” defined as “with the intent to prevent [a] gathering, … substantially obstruct[ing] or interfere[ing] with the meeting, procession, or gathering by physical action or verbal utterance.” Taken in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence shows that the Defendant posted on Facebook the day before the meeting and the day of the meeting that the protestors were going to “shut down” the meeting. During the meeting, the Defendant used a bullhorn to activate a siren for approximately twenty seconds. Witnesses at trial described the siren as “loud,” “high-pitched,” and “alarming.” Commissioner Jay called for “Officers,” and the Defendant stated through the bullhorn, “Knox County Commission, your meeting is over.” Commissioner Jay tried to bring the meeting back into order by banging his gavel, but the Defendant continued speaking through the bullhorn. Even when officers grabbed her and began escorting her out of the Large Assembly Room, she continued to disrupt the meeting by yelling for the officers to take their hands off her and by repeatedly calling them “murderers.” Commissioner Jay called a ten-minute recess during the incident, telling the jury that it was “virtually impossible” to continue the meeting during the Defendant’s disruption. The Defendant herself testified that the purpose of attending the meeting was to disrupt the Commission’s agenda and to force the Commission to prioritize its discussion on the school shooting. Although the duration of the disruption was about ninety seconds, the jury was able to view multiple videos of the incident and concluded that the Defendant substantially obstructed or interfered with the meeting. The evidence is sufficient to support the Defendant’s conviction. Defendant also claimed the statute was “unconstitutionally vague as applied to her because the statute does not state that it includes government meetings,” but the appellate court concluded that she had waived the argument by not raising it adequately below. Sean F. McDermott, Molly T. Martin, and Franklin Ammons, Assistant District Attorneys General, represent the state.

From State v. Every, decided by the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals…

1 of 96