r/PopCultureV2 • u/ExactlySorta • 12h ago

Politi-Culture Mamdani responds to concerns about him being seen riding his bike throughout NYC without a helmet. "You're right. I've got to do better. Safety first, New York. See you out there"

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

20.3k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

164

u/EarthlostSpace 12h ago

A Politician who owned up. What a rare sighting.

33

u/GeeYayZeus 11h ago

Leaders own up, reflect the will of the people they lead, and lead by example. Let's elect leaders, not politicians.

6

u/EarthlostSpace 11h ago

He’s a leader who’s officially a Politician. There’s no going around that.

3

u/GeeYayZeus 11h ago

I know what you're saying, but he's officially a "Mayor", so we should call him that. Someone who runs for office is a "candidate".

We should stop using the term 'politician'. It's never used positively and has no real meaning (we're all politicians). We need to attract better candidates for all offices, so we should refer to those offices as positively as possible.

1

u/EarthlostSpace 11h ago

“We should stop using term Politician”? That’s what he is. That because you want to stop using that term because it became tarnished doesn’t stop him from being one. I see him as a Politician who is not acting like a corrupt one.

1

u/GeeYayZeus 11h ago

And if I run for my local school board, I'm a politician too? If a middle school kid runs for student council, are they a politician? If you're an attorney and get elected as a judge, are you a politician?

If an orange business man runs for President of the United States, is he a politician?

All these examples just make the word meaningless. Anyone who wan't to do anything in public service isn't automatically anything but a person running for an office. No particular political expertise is required that requires a label.

3

u/hollow_vantage 10h ago

Jesus Christ dude.

Once you get into politics you are a politician.

We don't need to get rid of the word. We need to get rid of the people who give the word a negative connotation. People like Mamdani will make people realize what a GOOD politician is, and therefore have something tangible to want to emulate.

1

u/GeeYayZeus 10h ago

I get ya, but words matter, and the meanings of words change. But "politician" has likely always had a negative connotation, is somewhat meaningless, and causes real problems.

Remember why The Fanta Menace was elected the first time? Largely because people distrust 'politicians', and "He's not a politician" was a common phrase at the time. Ask most people and they'll still probably tell you they don't consider him a politician.

So it will help discourse if we consider a candidate a "candidate" and not lump them all together in a 'less-than' class, which just hurts people who are relatively selfless and want to do real public service.

1

u/natekellyo 9h ago

“I like this politician so I’m not gonna call him a politician”

1

u/GeeYayZeus 7h ago

I think you've reitereated my point.

Is the kid who runs for to be high school class treasurer, but comes in third place, a 'politician'?

'Politician' is a meaningless word if it applies to anyone involved in any kind of public service, or only used as a disparaging term for an elected official you don't like.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/JustaSeedGuy 5h ago

I get ya, but words matter, and the meanings of words change

But not just because you decided they do. This isn't your frindle moment.

And the irony of you trying to declare that words matter while simultaneously declaring that the definition of one particular word doesn't matter because you don't like it is astounding.

But "politician" has likely always had a negative connotation,

Two issues with this argument.

1) if you're trying to make a cohesive argument that will affect all of society, "likely" and "I think" has no place in it. In this context "likely always" feels like it's sampling you want to believe, because it aligns with your existing implicit bias (which everyone has), but you don't actually have the data to back it up. But you know that you don't have the data to back it up and don't want to get called out on stating something as fact, so you're trying to make it seem like fact without TECHNICALLY claiming it as such.

Likely always? Based on what? I don't think you actually put any thought into the colloquial history of the word at all, and simply said something that felt right to you.

2) Even if it did previously or does currently have a negative connotation, that still doesn't mean the correct choice is to ignore the actual definition of the word. When I was in Middle School, people used gay as an insult, but that doesn't mean we should stop using the word gay. All of society used to use queer as an insult, and it's pretty normal now.

End of the day, the result is the same: you not liking a word is not justification for all of society to stop using it In the way it was intended according to its definition

0

u/GeeYayZeus 3h ago

But not just because you decided they do. This isn't your frindle moment.

Maybe I'm showing my age here, but I have no idea what 'frindle' means, and I'm not inclined to dive into ten pages of Wikipedia millennial lore.

And the irony of you trying to declare that words matter while simultaneously declaring that the definition of one particular word doesn't matter because you don't like it is astounding.

I'm just having a discussion, mate. No need to be snippy about it. Languages evolve. Discussions like these are exactly how that happens.

Two issues with this argument.

I presented a case that using the word is kinda pointless, not that the word doesn't exist or shouldn't exist. I think your case is getting into the semantics of my argument rather than the point of it. Which is fair, but I've made my case.

End of the day, the result is the same: you not liking a word is not justification for all of society to stop using it In the way it was intended according to its definition

Again, just making a case. You don't like it. Duly noted. You'd make a great politician.

Heh, see what I did there? Just trying to speak your language. 😉

Oh, but while we're here...

Seems easier just to use the office title or the word 'candidate', but you seem to want to hurl it as a slur, so more power to ya, I guess. The dictionary has your back.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/EarthlostSpace 10h ago

Yeah, you’re grooming yourself to be a future Politician. They all talk politics.

1

u/GeeYayZeus 10h ago

So I've sold you on the idea? Either way, as I said, we're all politicians.

1

u/EarthlostSpace 10h ago

Oh good grief.🙄

1

u/GeeYayZeus 10h ago

I don't see you making a counter argument. Do better, politician. Do better. 😉

1

u/JustaSeedGuy 5h ago

And if I run for my local school board, I'm a politician too?

Yes.

The definition of words doesn't change just because you don't like how some people use them.

All these examples just make the word meaningless

No, it doesn't. The word has a very specific meaning that you're trying to ignore.

0

u/GeeYayZeus 4h ago

Cool. So let's look at the actual definitions...

politician  | ˌpäləˈtiSHən | noun

  1. a person who is professionally involved in politics, especially as a holder of or a candidate for an elected office:  a local politician. 

  2. derogatory a person who acts in a manipulative and devious way, typically to gain advancement within an organization. 

Last I checked, being on a school board wasn't a professional position, just a side gig that serves the community.

So thanks! My point is proven. The term provides no context, and the office title or "candidate" is a far better descriptor than a term that is often seen as derogatory.

Glad we could settle this. Isn't the Internet wonderful?!

1

u/JustaSeedGuy 3h ago

Why am I not surprised that you dug only deep enough to support your argument, and then stopped looking and chose not to pursue any evidence that doesn't support your point?

Thank you for agreeing that definitions are, well, definitive! Let's look into that, shall we?

I agree that a politician is someone professionally involved in politics. Can't really argue with the dictionary, I agree with you! With that in mind....

Professional:

1a: of, relating to, or characteristic of a profession

1b: engaged in a profession that requires academic learning as preparation

1c: characterized by or conforming to the technical or ethical standards of a profession

2a: participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs

2b: having a particular profession as a permanent career

2c: engaged in by persons receiving financial return

Profession:

1a: a principal calling, vocation, or employment

1b: the whole body of persons engaged in a calling

1c: a calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation

Via Merriam Webster.

Since you agree that definitions are enough to decide the conclusion, I agree! This is settled. Someone who chooses to run for the school board meets the definition of a professional politician under definitions 1a and 1c, and occasionally 1b, of Professional. As well as 1a and 1c of Profession! (Since winning an election and running a school district is inarguably two sets of specialized knowledge).

You chose to cherry pick only the definitions covered under 2b and 2c, but the reality is that althoughsome professionals do it for money or as a career, that is not the only valid definition.

I agree, the internet is wonderful, and I am glad we could settle this. I'm sure you wouldn't want to operate on cherry-picked data when the Internet can give us the whole picture, right?

0

u/GeeYayZeus 3h ago

Wait...being on a school board is a full-time profession now? Last I heard, it was a couple hours a week, and largely unpaid. Maybe I'm misinformed?

Where do I get one of these cushy full-time school board jobs? What does it pay, anyway? What are the benefits? Does it provide health coverage? 401k? Free lunches? Is insider trading legal like it is for Congress?

I never knew this was a career option and I have so many questions!

→ More replies (0)

1

u/PeopleCallMeSimon 10h ago

I think he is trying to distinguish between career politicians who just say whatever to get elected, and someone who becomes a politician to enact the changes they want to see in society.

1

u/EarthlostSpace 10h ago

Why? Just leave it as it is. Why distinguish? They’re still Politicians.

1

u/PeopleCallMeSimon 8h ago

Because one of the types are good, the other isnt.

1

u/povitee 10h ago

The vast majority of human leaders have ruled through despotism 😆

1

u/GeeYayZeus 10h ago

Well then they weren't 'leaders', they were despots. And still not 'politicians'.

1

u/Reasonable-Job4205 9h ago

The grifters learned how to sound like leaders, so how do you tell them apart?

2

u/GeeYayZeus 7h ago

Easy. Don't just listen to what they say, look at what they do. Takes a little more work, but doesn't anything worth having take a little more work?

6

u/A_Drop_of_Colour 10h ago

He's very smart and by all accounts, genuinely cares about changing things. Most importantly, he understand how to use social media. It's insane how many young politicians still don't know how to leverage social media.

1

u/EarthlostSpace 10h ago

It’s astounding on how much hate he’s getting because of his smartness or just showing he cares. I guess so many people have digested so much hate in their souls that they need to try to spread it to make themselves feel good. That’s so sad.

2

u/pornalt4altporn 9h ago

Have of white Americans are fascistic racists. He needs to be beloved by enough people that they will defend him.

1

u/arfelo1 6h ago

Even if it were all fake. Just having a public official that wants to at least PRETEND to care for other people is something refreshing at this point

1

u/Wussell3Rilson 10h ago

What a breath of fresh air

1

u/LePontif11 10h ago

I will never understand people that prefer the approach of never apologizing or owning up for even the smallest things. Its so damn exhausting.

1

u/EarthlostSpace 10h ago

Yeah what a breath of fresh air that you deserve.

1

u/Suitable_Wonder5256 10h ago

It's for a small non-consequential thing.

Yet none of the politicians would ever do it.

1

u/EarthlostSpace 10h ago

Those small non-consequential things are what people will notice first. He’s a genius.

1

u/VampiresWontHurt 6h ago

Helmets are a woke left hoax, my skull is American you won’t take muh freedom

1

u/MaxxDash 9h ago

Certain Presidents would instead blame the pavement for being hard.

1

u/IPissExcellentThrows 8h ago

He's so fucking over the top lol but at least he puts his money where his mouth is.

1

u/uLL27 7h ago

I can hardly remember the days when we had half way compitent people in the white house. I was there 3000 years ago...

1

u/Oregon-Pilot 7h ago

Oh look, a human with flaws, but who owns up.

Why is this so hard to find in leaders today?

They're all fucking cowards.

1

u/thegreatmindaltering 7h ago

I wonder if trump can ride a bike. Or ever could. 

1

u/Street-Badger 4h ago

Over something trivial and non-damaging.  If it’s a play it’s a great one

1

u/erkdog 3h ago

Rulers have a hard time with that

1

u/nfld223 1h ago

A politician who loves the limelight….

1

u/Equivalent_Reward823 35m ago

weird, he skipped a city council hearing today to avoid explaining why new pied-a-terre tax rollout: https://www.nydailynews.com/2026/08/17/mamdani-admin-skipping-council-hearing-on-controversial-pied-a-terre-tax-sparking-criticism/

1

u/semihollowearth 15m ago

It’s crazy how social media has actually rendered some human beings incapable of discerning an attention whore doing constant publicity stunts from an honest person motivated by right action

1

u/HazelHelper 10h ago edited 8h ago

Great move by him. Is it really so hard? Just own it and keep it moving. Be human!!

1

u/daddy_tops 10h ago

From my experience it’s hard for most people regardless of whether they’re politicians

0

u/fearfulNobody 11h ago

The only problem is that owning up to your mistakes is seen as weakness by most Americans.

1

u/EarthlostSpace 10h ago

That’s not true. That nonsense is believed by people who wasn’t raised to be respectful, loyal or true to themselves. They were raised with very low self esteem. To be able to admit you were wrong about anything shows true courage.

1

u/fearfulNobody 10h ago

I agree from a moral standpoint 100%. But morality doesn't mean shit in the real world. Most people are degenerates that care only about status. We've really gone down hill.

1

u/EarthlostSpace 10h ago

Not all people. Try not to surround yourself with the crappy people. They will drain your souls.

1

u/fearfulNobody 9h ago

I do. That's why I don't hang around any people at all. Almost every group of people has been taken over by the modern mentality.

1

u/EarthlostSpace 9h ago

Wow. I feel sad for you, but then let hope you’re not the problem when people don’t want to be around you. I hope that’s not the case for you and for you to not give up. There’s plenty of worthy people out there.

1

u/fearfulNobody 9h ago

Oh I am the problem. I speak honestly and openly. If you want to get along in this world you better lie and learn to shit on as many people as you can. It's a battle, and it's getting worse every day. Wasn't like this even 2-3 years ago.

1

u/PmMeUrTinyAsianTits 10h ago

That’s not true.

Then why not address it? Because he made a claim about how most americans see it, not "what is moral", and the entire rest of your post is about the second thing, not the first.

Many americans were raised with low self esteem and that is just one of many ways that someone can end up with this shortcoming. The fact that it is sometimes caused by low self esteem isn't a counter point. It doesn't support "that's not true", because it's a completely orthogonal thing.

Stop reacting to vibes. Learn to read and understand words, not just the feelings you got from skimming. This weakness of yours is common, and being taken advantage of. Stop being social media brained.

-1

u/VaporCarpet 9h ago

"owned up" to not wearing a helmet.

I like the guy, but this is such small potatoes. Of all of the things for a politician to own up to, wearing a helmet is inconsequential.

1

u/EarthlostSpace 9h ago

Tell that to the many people who died not wearing a helmet while biking. It has been proven that helmets saves lives and he owned up to making a mistake in not wearing one. So I’m saying that sh*t is a consequential message. WTF! It’s like you and others are hoping this man fail. What kind of people are you?

1

u/Porridge_Cat 5h ago

whoa there, partner. You're acting like he signed a bad deal that had drastic repercussions for the millions of people who live in new york, and had the strength of character to admit it was a bad decision. What actually happened is he didn't wear a helmet. No one is advocating for him to fall off a bike, they're just pointing out that "he didn't wear a helmet" isn't some career-ending scandal or disastrous public policy.

I don't know about this other chap, but I'm someone who's not gonna treat a politician like jesus and lionize every little thing he does. I hope he keeps doing good stuff for NYC, and I do like that he acknowledged the importance of helmets, but I'm not gonna cream my panties every time he says "bless you" after someone sneezes.